Warri crisis: Why we must embrace as brothers
By
The writer gives legal interpretation to fraudulent judgments on land cases in Warri and says let’s re-adjust and forget the past. IN all Atake’s publications and rejoinders he has always given excuses for replying. He said he knew me so well he didn't want to reply to my publications and that one of his friends who has just left detention strongly advised him to reply. Chief Atake did not tell us in which detention camp in present day democratic Nigeria his friend was detained, except he was detained for a criminal offence. Again I consider it necessary to issue a rejoinder to his publications in Vanguard edition of Friday June 22nd, and This Day of July 3, 2001 to correct some of his misinformation, his uncivilized attack on my person, and particularly to educate him on the meaning and legal implications of fraudulent judgements which unfortunately as a former judge of the High Court he could not understand. I have therefore decided to avoid comments on Decree 36 and other legal issues which are subject of litigation in suit No.A/177/99 which according to Justice Atake, in his verdict will be tried de novo, I do not want to commit contempt of court, and thus be in same category as Justice Atake who was found guilty of contempt by a Lagos High Court.
Justice Atake’s perceived verdict on Suit No. A/177/99
Here again, Justice F.O. Atake has goofed. He stated in his publication that Justice Odita, former Chief Judge of Delta State, deliberately delayed the judgement so as to be affected by the 90 days limitation which will make such judgement invalid and concluded that the case will now be tried de novo. Is this not a verdict? As a former High Court Judge, does he consider it fit and proper for him to comment openly on issues that are before the High Court of justice when he stated that Decree 36 of 1999 is an existing law and that neither the President nor the governor can amend it without a law enacted by the National Assembly?
There is no doubt that Atake would have committed to prison for contempt anyone who made such remarks on a case before him as a Judge of the High Court.
Justice Atake’s refusal to obey Supreme Court judgement in Boyo Vs Attorney General of Midwest.
Justice Atake contended that he was not a party to the even though he swore to an affidavit The case of contempt against him was before his court where he intimidated, abused and threatened Mr. Godwin Boyo who was at the time president of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA), that he would jail him because he Atake had power to try the case. This is what the Supreme Court frowned at and gave judgement that Atake was competent to try the case because the alleged contempt was not committed in the face of the court in addition to the fact that he allowed unhappy personal relationship to influence his judgement in the contempt proceeding against him. Justice Atake accepted that these were serious allegations and according to him if they were true they would definitely have resulted in his being ignobly removed from the Bench. In order to remove the stain and shame the Supreme Court judgement injected in him, he accused the Supreme court of making false allegations against him and that the evidence on which the Supreme Court based allegations of unhappy relationship between Mr. Boyo and himself was shrouded in mystery. Justice Atake commended profusely and arrogantly that the Advisory Judicial Committee found the allegations made against him by the Supreme Court of Nigeria as false and therefore exonerated him. He failed to take the world what the Advisory judicial Committee found to be false. Was it the judgement of the Supreme court or the memorandum sent to the Head of State General Yakubu Gowon by our beloved Governor Brig. S.O. Ogbemudia who acted on the advise of the Ministry of Justice headed by our most respected late Chief J.M Udoji who was the Attorney General at that time? Is it not an act of treachery and impropriety for Justice Atake as a retired High Court Justice to accuse the highest court of the nation presided over by the Chief Justice of the country, Sir Ademola Adetokunbo of making false allegations against him whereby he faulted their judgement in the famous Boyo case as null and void and of no legal consequence? Yet in his usual arrogance borne out of inferiority complex accused me of criticizing judges that gives judgement in favour of the Itsekiris.
In one breath, he accused me of criticizing judgements given in favour of the Itsekiri and at the same time, he arrogantly arrogates to himself the right to criticize judgement of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in Boyo’s case of 1970. "Chief Clark appears to think that I cannot criticize the Supreme court Justice. He is wrong. When a judge has delivered a judgement without detriment to the right of appeal both the judge and the judgement are given to the public for criticism if necessary provided that the criticism is based on facts or reasoned arguments and is made in temperate language.:
Justice Atake forgot that I was a member if Brig. Ogbemudia’s Government as a Commissioner for education between 1968 and 1971 when his indiscretion and vindictiveness, which a well educated and seasoned justice cannot be associate with, were exposed by the press. This crude action of justice Atake was a great disappointment and embarrassment to the Midwest State Judiciary and Midwest State Government in particular. He admitted that the judgement passed on him by the Supreme Court of Nigeria was enough to earn him a sack in the Midwest State Judiciary and this was exactly what the Midwest State Government could have dome to remove this bad egg from the midst of decent judge but it has no power to do so hence the governor referred the matter to the Head of State, Gen. Yakubu Gowon. Let us go back to the verdict of the Advisory Judicial Committee. The committee did not exonerate him but found his actions indiscreet.
Justice Atake regarded as irresponsible and reckless my criticism of the various judgement made in favour of the Itsekiri as being fraudulent and castigated me of not supporting my allegations with evidence. In my 1993 Press Conference in Benin City and my subsequent press controversy with late Alfred Rewane which were copiously reported by the press, I produced sufficient evidence to corroborated my contention that most of the judgements given in favour of the Itsekiris were fraudulent and to show my consistency and belief in this matter I reproduce hereunder part of my final address to the Justice Idoko Judicial Commission of Inquiry on 26th June, 1997.
"It would be recalled that the only claims the Itsekiris have against the Ijaws and the Urhobos in their memoranda and evidence were a catalogue of court judgments. It is my submission that those judgements alone cannot bestow on the Itsekiris the ownership of all lands in Warri Division which were not litigated upon. In all the memoranda submitted by the Ijaws and the Urhobos they categorically made it clear that such judgements were fraudulently obtained and therefore could not be accepted by them. Your Lordships will find from these judgements that they were either cases between individuals or between families or between villages and towns. Justice Atake is not the first to join issues with me on these cases. His superior leader, the late Alfred Rewane joined issues with me on the pages of newspapers over these cases between the Ijaws and the Itsekiris, which Atake now arrogate to himself as if he was the originator. In his memorandum to the Commission of Inquiry into the Warri crisis, he quoted word for word part of one of Rewane’s publications as stated below.
"On Thursday the 14th of May, 1993 at a press conference he held in Benin, Chief Clark who claims to be the foremost Ijaw National Leader, read out a statement in which he alleged that all judgements delivered by the High Courts, Supreme Court and Privy Council in London in favour of the Itsekiris in respect of Warri land were fraudulently obtained. There are over twenty cases decided or commented upon by over 19 judges of repute both in Nigeria and Britain in a period of nearly 100 years. According to Chief E.K. Clark, judgements delivered in favour of the Itsekiris in that period by these judges been "judgements delivered in favour of the Itsekiris in that period by these judges have been "judgements fraudulently contrived by the Itsekiris."
Chief Clark was called to the English Bar by the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn and was enrolled on the 30th of July 1965 as a Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria. He has served as Commissioner and Minister of State in this country. He obviously has no respect for the legal and judicial process and comes out in an incredibly, irresponsible manner to malign the judges not only of this country but of Britain as well."
In my reply to Rewane this was that I said.
"Mr. Alfred O. Rewane, the self proclaimed protector and leader of Itsekiri after Chief Dore Numa, made some publications in the Guardian of Thursday, May 7th which must reply to, comprehensively in order to set the record straight in respect of three matters of ownership of Warri through litigation. The correct title of Olu in pre-1936 Nigeria and the legal status of Ijaw Traditional Rulers vis-à-vis the Olu of Warri.
I hope all other self-appointed champions of the Itsekiri cause, like will read and learn the correct facts about their history.
Rewane, who is not a lawyer, grew quite hysterical, confused and incensed that I ever dared to say that some of the judgements decided in favour of the Itsekiris in respect of Warri land were obtained by "fraud." To him, my statment was irresponsible and contemptuous, his own understanding of the meaning of judgement obtained by fraud’ being tantamount to an impeachment of the integrity of the judges that decided those cases. I sympathise with him.
I therefore think that it is appropriate at the outset to educate the man as to the true meaning of the legal phrase "judgement obtained by fraud." I also wish to assure him that it has nothing to do with integrity, disposition, character and the competence of the Honourable Justices of the court.
Where facts which should have been presented to a Court of Law to arrive at the correct decision are not presented or are fraudulently presented, and cause the court to arrive at a different or wrong decision, or if the facts, if presented, would have led to a correct judgement, but if such facts are either deliberately hidden from the court, or falsely presented to the court then it could be said that the "judgement was obtained by fraud." In order to save time, I can only refer to some cases where the phrase "judgement obtained by fraud" has been deliberated upon by the House of Lords of England and the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
Jonesco Vs Beard H.I. Judgement obtained by Fraud (1930) Page 48 4.A 11R. Jurisdiction to order a new trial.
Preston Banking Co. Vs. Williams Allsup. Jurisdiction to set aside judgement obtained by fraud C.A, (1891-4)688.
Mac Carthy Vs, Agard (1933 2KB 417)
Where a defendant was wrongly described in the writ the judgement therefore was in wrong form a mistake due to the defendant’s fraud.
Jonesco Vs. Beard
As setting aside a judgement obtained by fraud, see 22 Halsbury’s Laws. (3rd Edition) 1760, 791 and as to granting a new trial, see 26 Halsbury’s Laws (2nd Edition) 124.
Note: The proper method of impeaching a complete judgment on grounds of Fraud, is by action in which, as in other actions based on fraud, the particulars of the fraud must be exactly given and allegation established by the proof of such a charge.
All the above decided English cases where issues of judgement obtained by fraud were exhaustively examined by the Supreme Court of Nigeria in the case of the Minister of Lagos Affairs, Mines and Power and others Vs Chief Akin Olugbade and others. Reported in(1974) all Nigeria Law Report Pages 226-234 and presided over by Elias, CJN, Coker and Ibekwe, JJSC."
The particulars of fraud in the judgements obtained by the Itsekiris were discovered after about 60 years of these judgements. Our fathers who were involved in these cases did not have access to these facts that are now available to us. In those days the Itsekiris and some of the Colonial masters conspired to oppress and dehumanise the illiterate Ijaws and Urhobos of Warri. The documents and some of the fact now available to us have been submitted to your lordship in our various memoranda as exhibits. Evidence of conspiracy between some of the officials of the colonial government and the Itsekiris are now available to us. One of such evidence is the letter addressed by Chief Dore Numa from his Odogene village to Col. Moore House the Lt. Governor of Southern Provinces in which he requested the assistance of the government if the Agbassa people took him to court and the willingness of Col. Moore House to assist the Itsekiris is contained in his minutes to the Resident of Warri. Also, the letters written by Chief Dore Numa on 9th January 1923 and 28th February, 1923 to Mr. S.L. Bucknor, Counsel to Agbassa and Okere people stated that the Olu of the Itsekiri merely exercised his suzerainty which does not amount to title to land. The Itsekiris have no answer to these impeachable facts, which were given at the Judicial Commission of Inquiry. Justice Atake who either because he has been out of practice for such a long time or because of his tribal sentiments arising from self proclaimed champion of Itsekiri interest has made some bombastic statements which he cannot substantiate.
It is sad indeed that a former High Court Judge could not differentiate between the meaning of "fraud in a criminal case" and "judgement obtained by fraud" in a civil case. This is most embarrassing. While I can forgive Late Mr. A.O. Rewane on the issue of judgement obtained by fraud, Justice Atake has no excuse."
I now reproduce hereunder for Justice Atake who has no knowledge of the events in Warri and who wants to arrogate to himself the leadership of the Itsekiris after the demise of our most respected and revered true Itsekiri leader who was very proud of his lineage which earned him the undaunted qualities of a real Itsekiri leader, the late Alfred Rewane, grandson of Governor Diare, a one time Governor of Benin River.
Justice Atake did not know of Chief Dore Numa’s confession and his approach to the colonial government in his cases against the Agbassa people and other people. I found it therefore necessary to educate him.
"Dore’s confessions
Of great significance are two letters of confession written by Chief Dore Numa to the people of Agbassa and Okere through their Lawyer and a third one to the Lt. Governor, Southern Provinces, Col. Moorehouse, informing him of his success in the case and of the intention of the Agbassa people to sue him for their land. Of equal importance are the official minutes and memos showing Col. Moorehouse’s preparedness to support Chief Dore if Agbassa people went to court.
Chief Dore, who had become worried and confused, wrote his two confessional letters to the Agbassa and Okere people, renouncing his claim to their lands in Warri, although the cases had all been won by the same Numa, at all levels and in grand style! Confessional letters by Chief Dore Numa to Okere and Agbassa people
From: Chief Dore Warri January 9th 1923.
To: Mr. S.L. Bucknor_Warri
Dear Sir,
I beg through you to inform your clients, the people of Okere, that I claim no title whatever to Okere land, either to my private capacity or as a member and representative of the Jekri Olu family.
That Okere land belongs to Okere people, though the Olu of Jekri has always had sovereign rights over all lands in Warri but such rights have nothing to do with ownership or title to land.
That I have collected no rents from the government in respect of Okere lands, but a present of 20 pounds was made by the government to me in respect of the area on which the prison and gang drivers quarters are erected, and this amount I am ready and willing to pay over to Okere people.
I remain, Dear Sir,
Yours faithfully,
(Sgd) Dore
From: Chief Dore, Warri, February, 28th 1923
To: Mr. S.L. Bucknor, Warri
Dear Sir,
I beg through you to inform your client the people of Agbassa that I claim no title whatever land either in my privacy capacity or as member and representative of the Jekri Olu people. That Agbassa land belong to Agbassa people although the Olu of Kekri has always had sovereign rights over all land in Warri but such rights have nothing to do with ownership or the title to land.
I remain, Dear sir,
Yours faithfully,
(Sgd).) Dore"
The government was stunned by Chief Dore’s confessions. Indeed the Chief must have been very worried about his interference and meddling with Warri land which belong to non-Itsekiri, namely, the Ijaw and the Urhobo, for he immediately addressed another letter from his hamlet Odogene, dated 23rd February, 1923 to His Honuor, Colonel M.C. Moorehouse, C.M.G., Lt. Governor Southern Province begging for protection. It is so interesting I reproduce it in full below.
Sir,
I have the honour to inform you that the Gborodoland case had been over and judgment was given in my favour by the Judge with 100 guinness costs. They have not paid the amount up to the present moment.
The people of Gbassah sued me also when the above case was on for 330 pounds (three hundred and thirty pounds) being rent of their land by the government for 11 years at 30 pounds per annum.
This case was dropped by them when I succeeded in the former case and for my trouble in the case the judge ruled that tenguiness should be paid to me. This, they have not paid me yet.
The only land at Agbassah that late Chief Ogbe and I leased to government 11 years ago is the land now used as the cemetery. I am not aware when the government took other land at Agbassah. The Governor on his last tour to Warri was petitioned by the people of Gbassa about their land.
The then Resident (Mr. Hives) told them that the matter did not worth any while and after some time Mr. Wood, the then District Officer, told them that I leased the land to government hence they have the boldness to sue me the other day; the Judge also ruled in the Gborodo land’s case that all lands belong to the Olu and as the Head of Olu family I am therefore in charge of all lands.
I understand it is the intention of the people of Agbassah to issue fresh summons to me but at present I cannot say what nature of summons it is. I therefore beg to bring these matters up for your information as you are in charge of this province with a view of knowing your opinion and I hope, Sir, you will not consider that I am troubling you. I bring up these matters by virtue of my office for all things have gone amiss in this province for the past two years.
I have the honour to be, sir, Your honour’s most obedient servant.
Dore (Paramount)
The Lt. Governor acted swiftly to protect his agent. Here are the minutes on Dore’s letter by Col.Moorehouse to the Resident of Warri Province:
Resident Warri
I discussed this with you, Chief Dore was present, no action can be taken until the Agbassah people make a definite move.
I have wired to Lagos to have all deeds and leases dealing with the government acquisition of land at Warri collected to await my return.
Yours,
(Sgd,)
H.C.M. Moorehouse
The Colonial government in Lagos was shocked and embarrassed by Dore’s confession and the extent they must have influenced the various court cases in order to maintain the status quo as to the owners of Warri land. I therefore reproduced hereunder the reaction of the colonial government:
From: The Commissioner of Lands Lagos
To: The Resident, Warri Province Reference your W. 555/1923.
This constitutes an entirely new development in the history of Warri land, viewed in the light of past history, the action of Chief Dore is inexplicable. For years he has contested his right to proprietary interest in the land.
It is difficult, therefore to understand why Dore made such a damning admission against himself.
However, the effect of the admission would appear to be contrary tot he judgment of the Supreme Court in the "Forcados Case" Chief Dore Vs Chief Olu and others.
His honour has requested more detailed information as to the circumstance under which the letter containing Dore’s admission was written.
Would you therefore be so good as to thoroughly investigate the matter. It is suggested that an interview with Dore might put a totally different complexion on the business.
(Sgd.) W.J. Fitzagerald
Ag. Commissioner of Lands.
Another memorandum from the Commissioner of Lands, reference 661/72/1923 dated 16th October, 1923 is also reproduced under:
From: The Commissioner of Lands, Lagos
To: The Secretary, Southern Provinces, Lagos
I attached memorandum and enclosure from Resident, Warri.
This constitutes a new and amazing development in the intricate history of Warri land. The effect of Dore’s admission is contrary to the judgment of Supreme Court in the Forcados case.
Moreover, as the whole question is the subject of litigation, the settlement will have to resolve the consent of court.
It is difficult to understand why Dore made such a damning admission against himself.
Last year, Dore tried to do back on certain deeds of conveyance to government but was unsuccessful and it may be that now he thinks he is placing government in an awkward situation by his admission.
For the moment, the whole position is too vague to form the subject of the memorandum reviewing the position of government in the light of the latest development.
I propose to write to the resident for a more detailed information on receipt of which will submit a memorandum dealing with the question.
In the meantime, I think you ought to know how this matter stands.
(Sgd) W.O. FitzGerald
Ag. Commissioner of Lands.
Chief Dore pretended to be the Olu of Itsekiri in all his litigations against his opponents. He had no locus standi to act as plaintiff. He was therefore a impostor who in addition used his position as the political agent of British to influence the various judgements. To prove that Chief Dore had no locus standi, I reproduce hereunder the petition written by the Princess of Akengbuwa to Col. Moorehouse protesting against Dore Numa’s claim of the Olu’s title:
Sir,
With reference to our interview with you on the subject of land case between the Olu Akengbuwa family and Dore Numa which you intend to settle...the settlement cannot be arrived at if we had to sign on a new arrangement with Dore, because our main contention, which is still pending, is to restrain him from anything bearing the title or superscription of Olu Itsekiri, of which Akengbuwa was the latest holder....
Among the royal children who signed and dispatched the letter to the Governor of Southern Nigeria, then styled Lieutenant_Governor, were Chiefs Ogbobine; Omagbemi; Skinn; Jim Ukuejuno Etchie; Denedo Etuwewe; Gbenebitse; Ekeke Ekenusi; Edu Kperegbeyi; Omatsuli Egbegbe; E. Okorodudu; Otseju Cheke; W.I., Omatsola; and W.A. Moore.
"In this case, the Omadinos sued Gbaminido Pompolo over ownership of Egwa 1 Flow Station. Kantu wanted to join to claim her land. His Royal Highness Erejuwa ll the then Olu of Warri discouraged them after certain terms were agreed with Omadino. Kantu refused to give evidence that the land belong to Omadino, so Omadino had to arrange for one of her indigenes Mr. Tina who before his death was the Olaraja of Omadino, to pose as the accredited witness of Kantu in Suit No. W/M/168/90 asking for a declaration that they own all Egwa including all those areas in the survey plan in their suit. Some Kantu indigenes refused to challenge Omadino’s false claim. This case was in court for over six years. Just before Omadino was to win it technically some elites of Kantu got the chance to provide the impetus to make Kantu victorious. If this intrigues and conspiracies to steal Kantu land by Omadino people were not checkmate by Kantu elites the Omadino people could have won the Egwa land from Kantu fraudulently. It must be realised here that Erejuwa ll the late Olu of Warri and the father of the present Olu Atuwatse the ll was maternally Kantu, an Ijaw village.
You can see from the above incident how fraudulent it was for the Omadino people to suborn witnesses to give them an advantage in the said suit. The impersonation of a Kantu man by Omadino as if it was a Kantu man giving evidence in the case would have no doubt affected the judgement. This is therefore a clear example of fraudulent judgement in recent times. There are many other cases including some of those listed by Justice Atake where the Itsekiris had judgements against the Ijaws of Warri through representation of Ijaw defendants, documents, false witnesses etc. without the participation of the Ijaws yet judgement was given against them. There were also cases where documents which should have been tendered in court, were withheld from the court purposefully to obtain judgements in the favour of the Itsekiris. This was the case of Agbassa people Vs. Dore Numa whereby the letter written by Chief Dore Numa disclaiming the ownership of Agbassa people was not tendered in court and thereby giving judgmenet in favour of the Itsekiris as owners of Agbassa land. It was also an obvious fact that the impersonation of the Olu of Itsekiris by Chief Dore Numa, that he was the Olu of Itsekiri whereas there was no Olu of Itsekiri reigning at the time seriously affected the various judgments in which he posed as the Olu of Itsekiri.
Justice Atake in his followness in ideas and law is therefore not in the position to understand the difference between fraud in a criminal case and fraud in a civil case.
Discontinuance of Suit No. W/148/56 by the Ijaws of Ogbe Ijoh.
In Justice Atake’s wild and false claims that the Itsekiri have won all land cases in Warri Division and have no more to win, he cited Suit No. W/148/56 in which he claims that the Ijaws who were the plaintiffs in the suit has no defence hence they decided to file motion to discontinue the case having seen the formidable statement of defence of the Itsekiris. This reckless assertion of Justice Atake is false and misleading. It is necessary therefore to state the correct facts of the motion to discontinue the action brought by the Ogbe Ijoh people as plaintiffs.
"Strangely, on the day of hearing the Olu, Erejuwa II, who was the defendant in Suit No. W/148/56 and plaintiff in Suit N. w/63/58 did not appear in court, and according to the Judge no one could account for his absence. The second surprise was that the Itsekiri then applied to the court for leave to strike out Suit No.W/63/58 instituted by the Olu of Warri against the Ogbe Ijoh as counter claim. The application was opposed by theOgbe Ijoh people through their lawyer.
The application by the Itsekiri was made on 13/4/64. On 29/6/64 Justice H.W. Rhodes Vivour ruled in their favour.
At this point, the late Honourable Festus Okotie_Eboh, a prominent Itsekiri figure, in his exalted position as Federal Minister of Finance, made an intervention by inviting the Ogbe Ijoh people to attend a meeting with other Ijaw leaders, including the late Senator J,M. Egbuson, Chief N.K. Porbeni, Chief B.K. Erebi and Chief N. Ezonbodoh, during which he appealed to the Ogbe Ijoh people to withdraw their action from court in the interest of unity and good relationship between the Ijaws and the Itsekiris, for, it was only when the Ijaws and the Itsekiris work together in the ten newly created Midwestern region, that they would be able to achieve some benefits for themselves.
A committee was then set up to draw up the terms of withdrawal. Thereafter, the motion for discontinuance was filed by the Ogbe Ijoh people.
To the shock of the Ogbe_Ijoh, their motion was opposed by the defendants in a typical act of perfidy on the ground that the case had been fixed for hearing in June 1964. The date for hearing was duly fixed, although the application for withdrawal or striking out of suit No. W/63/59 by the Olu had been granted by the same judge in the same court.
Mr. Godwin Boyo for the defendants asked the court to dismiss plaintiffs’ claim with costs in the absence of genuine reasons for the discontinuance and argued that there was no similarity under which suit No. W/63/58 brought by the Itsekiris was discontinued and the circumstances under which the plaintiff, the Ijaws in suit No. W/148/56, sought to discontinue their suit.
The judge obliged himand dismissed the claim with a condition that the plaintiffs, that is, the Ogbe Ijoh people, were "precluded" from bringing further action against any or either of the 1st and 2nd defendants in respect of their claims of which specific particulars were given in the writ of summons, statement of claims and amended statement of claim in this action. Leave was accordingly granted the plaintiffs to discontinue the action.
The Ogbe Ijoh people and the entire Warri community of Iho and Urhobo were aggrieved by the oppressive ruling because no one could understand why the Itsekiris, who brought Suit No. W/63/58 against Ogbe Ijoh without giving any reason and particularly when the plaintiff (the Olu) in that suit did not appear in court and no one could account for his absence. Clearly, it was ridiculous, unjust, oppressive and inconsistent for the same Justice Rhodes Vivour in the same court to impose unprecedented and unwarranted conditions on the Ogbe Ijoh people when they similarly applied for the discontinuance of their action against the Itsekiri people, giving reasons for the discontinuance.
It must be noted that there were no legal arguments on the merit of the case before both sides made applications to the court for withdrawal. However, the issues that went on appeal to the Supreme Court were procedural and were mainly on points of law, and not facts. While the court precluded Ogbe Ijoh people from instituting another action against the Itsekiris, it was the fear of losing woefully to the Ogbe Ijoh in many subsequent litigations taht scared and precluded the Itsekiri from instituting another action against the Ogbe_Ijoh people since the discontinuance of their claim in suit No.W/63/58.
At this point, it must be made abundantly clear that the two cases which were set for hearing on 29th June, 1964 were never heard. Both parties, namely, the Itsekiri and the Ogbe Ijoh, decided to discontinue their claims in Suits No. W/148/56 and W/63/58. The case therefore remains open as to who owns Warri."
It is with this background I objected to the subsequent appointment of Justice Rhodes_Vivour by Governor S.O. Ogbemudia as chairman of a Peace Committee set up by the government to look into the ethnic problems in Warri in 1971. Justice Atake asserted in his publication that "the problem with Chief Clark is that he had no practice." This unethical attack on my professional integrity did not however come to me as a surprise because it comes from a man whois obsessed and proud of his first generation achievements and who is so full of himself to the extent that he does not care about what he says about other people.
Secondly, Atake, who was a very junior judge was not known in Warri judicial circle and hence he is completely ignorant about my practice as a lawyer in Warri. In the first place, I am a law graduate of the University of London, I am an honourable member of the Inner Temple between 1961 and 1965, where I obtained my BL. My colleagues included eminent jurist such as Justice S.O. Uwaifo of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, Justice Kalgo also of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, Justice Jinadu of the Federal High Court, Lagos, Justice Ugwu, Chief Judge of enugu State, Justice Sado of Benin High Court and Justice (Mrs) Victoria Onejeme, formerly of Abuja High Court. Others include our great freedom fighters, Chief Gani Fawehinmi and Dr. Olu Onagoruwa. It is on record that Justice Atake studied for 18 months to pass the Council of Legal Education Bar examination. This self acclaimed brilliant lawyer had no resources to study for a law degree. I now wish to state my activities in my brief legal practice in Warri where I had my Bekederemo Chambers at No. 16 Robert Road, Warri, before I was appointed Commissioner in 1968. Justice Victor Okor, a retired Judge of the Rivers State Judiciary was one of the junior lawyers that practised under me. I also had my law chambers at No. 19 Martins Street, 3rd floor and both Mrs. Stella Oghene who is now the president of the Customary Courts, Delta State and Mrs. Tebekaemi, Deputy Registrar, Customary Court of Appeal, Asaba and Mr. Ohimayi practised under me. I also had retainership with several parastatals including NPA, UBA, etc. whereas Justice Atake had no practice before he became a Magistrate in 1957. Before I opened my chambers, I practised under Justice Rufus Ogboline and Dr. Mudiaga Odje and I appeared in several courts. When I establibsed my own chambers I had the privilege of appearing in more superior High Courts than Justice Atake’s courts. And for the avoidance of doubt, I appeared in late Justice Arthur Prest’s Court, Justice Ovie Whisky’s court, Justice Akpovi’s court, etc, and my performance in court as a young lawyer was acknowledged by the judges.
I am intrigued to hear Atake assert that if his father was Urhobo and so what? Because according to him, "one would not know that my father was Urhobo unless someone was told. He lived amongst the Itsekiris all the days of his life." What Atake is saying here is that both his father and himself grew up as Itsekiri men whereby hsi father was assimilated to the extent that he did not know his Urhobo lineage. Atake’s father’s case cannot therefore be regarded as a classic example of inter ethnic marriage. In Atake’s father case, he lost his Urhobo identity until his death. I wish to emphasise taht I cannot be seen to eb against inter ethnic marriage because I am a product of it. It is ironical that Justice Atake should arrogate to himself the qualities of an average Itsekiri man as enumerated inhis publication such as culture, traditions and customs antecedents and values. If Atake is civilised enough he should have knwon my antecedents and he is therefore not qualified to talk about culture, tradition, etc, of the Itsekiris because you can only give what you have. He does nto coem within the description of the Itsekiri man he illustrated in his publication. I challenged him to state his genealogy both in Urhobo and Itsekiri. Justice Atake should stop parading himself as an Itsekiri man whom the Itsekiris according to him have appointed or elected as their leader. However, Justice Atake has missed the point which I illustrated in my publication of March 21, 2001. The point I emphasised in my publicationis that the Itsekiris, the Ijaws and the Urhobos should live in peace because they have so much in common through inter tribal marriage.
Justice Atake stupidly and shamelessly advised me to stop giving a long genealogical account to link himself with the Itsekiris. I am proud of my Itsekiri genealogy, which span over seven generations if I start with the famous Oshoron of Egbokodo. This Atake cannot do. Who is Atake to say taht the Itsekiris do not accept or recognise me as an Itsekiri man? I am a descendant of Oshoron of Egbokodo a very prominent Itsekiri chieftains in Itsekiri land. I accept that I am an Ijaw man from Kiagbodo in Burutu Local Government Area. Why has Atake refused to accept that he is an Urboho man from Orogun in Ughelli North Local Government Area? As a descendant of Ekian of Ogbe Ijoh Kingdom I am also from Warri South West Local Government Area and as a descendant of Oshoron I am from Warri South Local Government. Justice Atake by his birth is not a native of all the three local government areas in Warri Division. If we believe his arrogant assertion that his mother was from Bateren or Jakpa then maternally he is from Warri North Local Government and therefore cannto claim to be a Warri man. He came to Warri town as a magistrate and retired to settle in Warri. He should go back to where his parents lived at the Itsekiri enclave in Sapele. Justice Atake would want to leave the Itsekiris and the Ijaws alone and here I would like to quote him to expose his insincerity and callousness.
"He should therefore concern himself with the affairs of his local government and leave the Ijaws of Warri Division to explore joint endeavours with the Itsekiris to restore the peace which formerly existed between them, the peace which Clark shattered by advocating rejection of court judgements and thus incite the Ijaws to passion and violence against the Itsekiri. He eventually had as his comrade in arms the equally irresponsible Col. Dungs (rtd), it is not generally realised that before Chief Clark began to inflame passion against the Itsekiris the Ijaws never resorted to violence against the Itsekiri in spite of the many law suits between them."
It should noted that there was no time the Ijaws were subjects of the Olu of Itsekiri. At various times, treaties were signed with the various ethnic groups by the colonial government. The colonial masters entered into separate treaties of protection with each of the ethnic groups: then Ijaws, the Urhobos and the Itsekiris as separated and independent communities. Then Nigeria became a colonial subject, but before the amalgamation, British influence was present in various parts of Nigeria. In Warri division for example, this presence began to be felt by all living in Warri in what is now known as the leases of 1906, 1908, and 1911. It should also be recalled that in the colonial administration, Nigeria was broken into provinces. divisions and districts. One of the divisions in the then Southern Nigeria was the Jekri/Sobo division which was made up of the Urhobos, the Itsekiri and the Ijaws. However, in the course of time, this larger division broke up. The Jekri/Sobo division was too small to forma viable division, the British colonial administration persuaded Gbaramatu Clan (then in Forcados District) Egbema (then in Sapele District) to join with the Itsekirri and the Ijaws of Ogbe Ijoh to form what became Warri Division. That was how the three ethnic groups found themselves under once administrative until. It is therefore unacceptable for one group to try to lord itself over the others.
I have no regret of my involvement in the Warri crisis because it was a struggle to free the dehumanized Ijaw man in Warri from slavery, oppression, indignity, discrimination, inhumanity to man, deprivation of rights and intimidation. I an proud that I have played the role of Moses leading the Jews from the oppressive hands of the Egyptians into the land of Canaan. Atake and his Itsekiri cohorts should stop their hypocrisy and stop fooling the public. No right thinking Ijaw man would accept the kind of peace Atake said existed between the Ijaws and Itsekiri before the Warri, there must be mutual trust, equality of opportunities and co-ownership of Warri.
Justice Atake said I shattered the peace that existed between the Ijaws and the Itsekiri "by advocating the rejection of court judgements and thus incite the Ijaws to passion and violence against the Itsekiri". But what I proudly and victoriously shattered was the shackles of the suffering and oppressed Ijaws man from the Itsekiri bondage. And any Itsekiri man particularly Justice Atake and his cohorts who believe in the relationship between the Itsekiri and the Ijaws of Warri as that of master and servant would definitely not like my guts and they should now hang their heads in shame now that the truth has been established and the Ijaws are free to take their rightful place in Warri affairs.
Justice Atake has again crudely referred to Col. J.D. Dungs former Military Administrator of Delta State as an irresponsible man as he referred to Chief James Ibori in his recent publication in the Vanguard of Friday June 22, and This Day of Tuesday July 3, 2001 where he stated that "I have merely restated and amplified the contention my delegation forwarded to Governor Ibori which he rudely ignored"
Again the self-centered Atake has demonstrated his lack respect for those in authority and this shows the working of an evil mind and lack of decent background.
Finally, I wish to refer to the irresponsible and abusive language Atake used against my person. Wherever looks Atake attributes to me which is his personal opinion I wish to challenge him that with my famous family background characterized with rich culture and tradition, I am more in a position to be accepted by any well educated and cultured Itsekiri lady as a husband while they would easily reject Atake because he has good family background to fall back to. These are the things the family of any decent educated girl will look for in a man who wants to marry their daughter. My advice of the Itsekiris because majority of descent, cultured Itsekiri people are laughing at him and watching his false steps because unlike Justice Atake they know the hierarchy of Itsekiri leadership since Akengbuwa I the Olu of Itsekiri.
Once again I advise Atake not to open old wounds because the Ijaws are no longer ready to lick these wounds. Lets live together in peace and forget the past.
We should encourage positive thinking to prevail in order to have permanent peace in Warri and environ. There is no reason why we cannot live together now and pray the Almighty God to forgive us for our sins for the harm, damages and loses we have caused to ourselves particularly during the various crises such as in 1952,1993,1997 and 1999. The Almighty God our creator knew what he was doing when he created the Urhobos, Ijaws and the Itsekiris to live together in the same vicinity and made it possible to inter-marry and we are products of such marriages. It is therefore, not possible for us to live apart as permanent enemies, God will not forgive us. History has it that it that France and Germany, two separate European countries were the bitterest enemies during the Second World War 1939-1945 and the entry of Great Britain and the United State of America was to support France against Germany but today France and Germany are the closet allies within the European Union. We must abhor suspicious and mistrust and we must understand that as brothers there can never be a position of inferior and superior relation. We must be prepared to adjust and change with time if the circumstances which gave rise to such ugly situation where a brother regarded himself as a superior being as master or overlord of his fellow brother no longer exist.
It is failure or refusal of some us to accept the fact that time and situation have changed that is causing the frequent and unpleasant inter-communal conflict amongst us. We cannot win always. Let us not behave as if we can no longer embrace love and peaceful co-existence.
Today we have lost out in everything because of our hatred and envy of one another. Those who exploit and loot our God-given resources are not Ijaws, Urhobos, Itsekiri or Isokos. For instance 90% of the management staff and other appointment in all the oil companies in the Delta are not Deltans. We are not among the major contractors of oil companies and we do not lift oil. Even in the present Obasanjo Administration, we are nowhere to be reckon with in dishing out government patronage. No Itsekiri, Ijaws, Urhobo or Isoko indigene have been given any important political appointment, they have no doubt taken advantage of our disunity, mistrust and unwarranted and avoidable misunderstanding or conflict.
They say it openly to our anger and embarrassment that "those people don’t agree among themselves, therefore, if you give a job to one of them say Itsekiri man, Urhobo or Ijaw man will kick against him and vis-à-vis If we all recognise where we come from, our ancestral background, common destiny we will surely overcome. Therefore, Justice Atake, let us embrace ourselves as brothers.
Enough is Enough.
November 2001