Ijaw Rights Group Tackles INEC Over Warri Federal Constituency Delineation Report, Describes Delay As Institutional Sabotage Of Democracy -

By Uche Alvin

OPEN LETTER TO INEC

From: Concerned Ijaws Stakeholders of Warri Federal Constituency
Date: 4/1/2026

The Manufactured Lie of Itsekiri Exclusivity and the Deliberate Institutional Sabotage of Democracy by INEC

This open letter is not drafted to persuade. It is written to expose, confront and corner falsehood until it collapses under the weight of its own rot. What is happening in Warri Federal Constituency is no longer a dispute of narratives; it is the calculated strangulation of truth by delay, aided by silence and sustained by cowardice.

Let it be understood from the first sentence: the claim of exclusive Itsekiri ownership of Warri is a historical fraud, recycled by opportunists and now dangerously reinforced by institutional paralysis. What began as propaganda has metastasized into policy sabotage, with Independent National Electoral Commission standing uncomfortably close to the crime scene.

History has already testified. Records have already spoken. Archives have already judged. The Ijaw presence in Warri did not emerge from invitation; it preceded migration. The 1928 Warri Township Assessment Report did not speculate; it recorded that Ogbe-Ijoh, the Ijaw fish market, formed the nucleus of Warri Township. This fact has never been overturned, only ignored by those who fear it.

Even Itsekiri scholarship has betrayed the lie. William Moore admitted the obvious: before Prince Ginuwa’s exile, the land was occupied by Ijaws and Sobos (Urhobos). That admission alone should have buried exclusivity forever. Instead, it was buried, while the lie was dressed in royal language and repeated until some began mistaking repetition for truth.

Let us strip away sentiment and speak brutally: Prince Ginuwa arrived as a refugee, not a conqueror. He entered Ijaw territory escorted by Ijaw canoe men. He lived in Ijaw towns, married Ijaw women and died on Ijaw soil. Hospitality was not conquest. Shelter was not sovereignty. Tenancy does not alchemize into ownership, no matter how long the tenant shouts.

The courts did not whisper on this matter; they ruled. In Okere-Urhobo v. Itsekiri (W/28/65), tenancy was judicially declared. In Ebilo v. Dore Numa (3/33, 1933), tribute was ordered on Egbema Ijaw land. These judgments were not appealed into oblivion, they were simply inconvenient. And inconvenient truths, when faced by dishonest actors, are not rebutted; they are hidden.

Colonial administrators were not confused either. Pretheroe did not describe a monopoly; he described a plural society. Bowen did not celebrate dominance; he warned of sly attempts at domination. These were British officers with no emotional investment in ethnic supremacy, yet they saw clearly what today’s revisionists deny loudly.

Even the Itsekiri elite’s private conduct betrays their public claims. Palaces stand on leased land. Burials occur on leased land. Homes rise on leased land. Landlords do not lease land from tenants. This contradiction alone is a confession.

Against this mountain of evidence stands one dangerous actor: INEC’s silence.

The refusal to publish the final ward delineation result, already verified, already concluded, already ordered by the Supreme Court in SC/CV/1033/2022 (Timinimi v. INEC), is no longer defensible. It is institutional misconduct by omission. Section 287(1) of the Constitution does not negotiate obedience; it commands it.

By withholding the result, INEC has crossed from neutrality into functional bias. An umpire who watches the game, confirms the foul and then pockets the whistle is not neutral, he is complicit. Delay, at this point, is a political act with ethnic beneficiaries. And everyone knows who benefits.

This letter therefore serves as formal notice:
INEC is rapidly exhausting the presumption of impartiality.
INEC is testing the limits of public tolerance.
INEC is gambling with legitimacy.

Let it be written plainly: no final delineation, No electoral activities in Warri Federal Constituency is legitimate. no moral authority. No public cooperation. Democracy does not function on coerced participation; it collapses under it.

We remind all parties that suppressed justice does not disappear. It accumulates pressure. And accumulated pressure eventually finds lawful, political and historical release. When that moment arrives, excuses will be irrelevant and silence will be useless.

As Edwin Kiagbodo Clark stated with clarity that still haunts dishonest actors:
“The Itsekiris, Urhobos and Ijaws are all indigenes of Warri. No group can claim superiority.”
That statement was not an opinion; it was a verdict of conscience.

INEC must now decide how it will be remembered:
as an institution that upheld law under pressure,
or as one that delayed truth until truth turned unforgiving.

This open letter is a warning, not a request.
Publish the final ward delineation result immediately.
Obey the Supreme Court.
Stop laundering falsehood through silence.
History has finished writing its part.
The law has spoken.
The people are watching.

Signed:

Chief Tiemopere Joshua — President

Chief Ebikeme T. Godstime — Secretary

Concerned Ijaw Stakeholders of Warri Federal Constituency

Cc:
The President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria;
The National Security Adviser;
The Attorney-General of the Federation;
The Inspector-General of Police;
The Director-General, DSS;
The Chief of Defence Staff;
The Senate President;
The Speaker, House of Representatives;
The Governor of Delta State;
International Community;
Civil Society and Human Rights Organisations.