Mr. Alexander Ifechukwude, who describes himself as the traditional ruler of Olu-Odu Community in Aniocha South Local Government Area of Delta State, testified at the ongoing hearings of a judicial panel investigating kingship and land disputes in Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom and neighboring communities. The panel, led by Justice E.N. Emudainowho, commenced its sittings on November 7 in Asaba and is expected to conclude by November 20, 2024.
Mr. Ifechukwude claimed that he ascended the throne following the death of his father in 1999, who, according to him, had been crowned as king of Olu-Odu in 1975. Despite acknowledging that neither he nor his father ever received a staff of office from the Delta state government, he argued that such formal recognition was unnecessary for him to rule.
Government Recognition Disputed
Under cross-examination by counsel to the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom, including Chike Onyemenam SAN, Ikhie Ehighelua, Dr. Judith Jessa, and Henry Ogidi, Mr. Ifechukwude admitted to petitioning the state government for recognition in 2007 but alleged that the late Obi of Ogwashi-Uku, Prof. Chukwuka Okonjo, obstructed the process. He also acknowledged selling extensive portions of community land, including 1,500 hectares in one transaction and 500 hectares in another, without proper authorization.
The legal team for the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku presented multiple documents to disprove Mr. Ifechukwude’s claims, including Ministry of Justice correspondence advising his prosecution for impersonation and charge sheets from a magistrate court in Ogwashi-Uku. Counsel also cited a Western Region Law of 1952 and a 1935 intelligence report listing Olu-Odu as part of Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom.
Otulu Community Seeks Autonomy
The panel also heard a petition from representatives of Otulu community, who requested recognition as an autonomous community. Under cross-examination, Mr. Chukwuma Akoka, a petitioner, denied knowledge of state gazettes linking Otulu to Ogwashi-Uku or any government-sanctioned traditional ruler for Otulu. He acknowledged that Mr. Francis Oduwanor has been parading himself as a traditional ruler of Otulu.
Counsel for the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku, Dr. Jessa, countered that Otulu remains a farm settlement under Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom. She pointed to a High Court judgment by Justice Z.A. Smith affirming the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku’s exclusive authority to appoint chiefs in Otulu, nullifying rival claims.
She also tendered Western Region and Bendel State gazettes listing Otulu as part of Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom. Christopher Isikekpe who also testified as representing himself and Francis Oduwanor confirmed that he was parading himself as the Iyase of Otulu without any government recognition or approval.
He claimed that they did not need government approval to be traditional chiefs and that some people in Otulu elected Francis Oduwanor as the Obi of Otulu. When confronted with a letter to the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku on a letterheaded paper of Otulu Ogwashi-Uku and signed by members of the community including Francis Oduwanor as youth leader, he claimed he didn’t know about the letter and that the community was known as Otulu Ugo.
He was then shown letters by Barrister Henry Ogidi from the Aniocha South local government expressly stating that the name was Otulu Ogwashi-Uku and that any name change to Otulu Ugo was illegal, he kept silent and refused to answer the questions posed to him.
Also tendered by the lawyers to the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku was a letter from the Directorate of Chieftaincy Affairs expressly stating that Otulu had no traditional ruler and that they were under the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom. The self acclaimed Obi of Otulu, Francis Oduwanor was not present at the hearing. Our sources confirmed that he is in custody in Abuja facing serious federal charges for crimes committed.
Complex Land and Kingship Disputes
The proceedings have revealed deep tensions over land ownership and traditional rulership, with allegations of unauthorized land sales and competing claims of autonomy. Witnesses from Otulu admitted to having roots in other communities, raising further questions about the legitimacy of their autonomy bid.
The judicial panel, described as a fact-finding body, emphasized the need for critical evidence and documentation to guide its recommendations for resolving the disputes and promoting peaceful coexistence.
Hearing continues this week as the panel works towards its final report.
