Four Kings And Three Nations In One Kingdom?: Warri City And The Wado-City Template For Equity, Justice And Fairness

By John Uwa

When the muse to write this essay came visiting, the plan was just to point to the counterproductivity of the presence of four kings in Warri without alluding to Chinua Achebe’s metaphor as I did in an earlier essay on the same subject. But how can one ignore the fictional metaphors of a man whose work provides an illuminating spectacle that alludes to territorial disquiet in Warri, and at the same, embodies a template for conflict resolution? In his communal novel, Arrow of God, Chinua Achebe mirrors the land dispute between two neighbouring communities—Umuaro and Okperi that claimed precious lives, the colonial politics of conflict resolution, divide-and-rule principle and indirect rule. Even more intriguing is the testimony of the Chief Priest of Ulu, named Ezeulu, who had to testify against his people before the colonial court hearing the case of the disputed land. Situating the scenario of Achebe’s novel within the context of the colonial province of Warri, and the land disputes between the Urhobo of Okere, Agbassa and the Itsekiri, a certain controversial Chief, Dore Numa, comes to mind. Dore Numa was a British Warrant Chief from Benin River appointed as the Paramount Chief of Warri Province; like Ezeulu he became like a demigod who wields enormous power over the people of the colonial conurbation called Warri. The enormity of his power manifests in his leasing of such lands like Agbassa, Ogbe-Ijho, Ogidigben, Sapele, Oghara; not as an Itsekiri man or representative of the Olu of Itsekiri, since there no King at the time in Itsekiri land, but as a warrant Chief. This leasing would be the basis for the Overlordship claims of the Itsekiri kingdom over Warri Province—a province so named by the colonial master, which extended to Ukwani land at the time. This arbitrary leasing of ancestral land would result in litigations in court where Dore Numa himself was Chief Judge. While Dore Numa was notorious for edging out the Urhobo on the ground of legal technicalities in the land cases he sat upon, he gave an amazing judgement that would alter the course of the history of the overlordship of Warri.

In his submission on the disputed Okere Urhobo land in 1927 Dore Numa, aggrieved by the ingratitude of his kinsmen for cases he fraudulently decided in their favour, held that “the Urhobos and Jikiris have been living together for centuries, without one paying rent to the other… and I cannot hold so now…” (Nikoro vs Okumagbe: 1927). The judgement implies that, whatever leases he made as Warrant Chief on behalf of the colonial masters, in the Urhobo enclave of Warri Province falls short of equity, justice and fairness; because such leases, as Warrant Chief, translate to robbing Peter to pay Paul. And with just a little strategic thinking, even a man of average intellect could see that Dore Numa’s judgement, knowingly or unknowingly, sets a template for conflict resolution in Warri, and nullifies the whole idea of the overlordship of Warri by one ethnic group over the other. Time will fail me to dwell on the colonial history of the name ‘Warri’, how Warri Province changed to Delta Province, and how predatory names and titles emerged through some obnoxious political manoeuvrings to give the Itsekiri advantage over the Ijaw and Urhobo ethnicities in Warri; a tragic political move that has since triggered the ethnic disquiet in Warri till date.

The verifiable historical facts highlighted above are not intended to stir up the hornet’s nest, but to have a clear sense of history in the advocacy for peaceful coexistence between the ethnic nationalities occupying the ‘Warri space’. More so, when an idol, becomes too powerful and arrogant, we often remind him of the wood whence it was carved. Fortunately, the colonial era of overlordship has since been rendered redundant and repugnant by the 1979 constitution and Bendel State (now Edo and Delta State) Land Use Act which lodges the power to own all lands in a state in the hands of the governor. And with this residual power, the state government has had to set up different panels, commissions and bodies to proffer lasting solutions to the Warri crisis. The most progressive step made so far is the institutionalisation of four kings of equal status—the Orosuen Okere Urhobo, The Ovie of Agbassa, The Pere of Ogbi-Ijoh and the Olu of Warri (originally Olu of Itsekiri). The move appears to release some light and freshness into the hanging cloud of darkness that was enveloping the Warri city at the time. However, with the constant claim of ownership over Warri by the Itsekiri and the refusal of the other ethnicities to accept such an ambitious claim, this palliative move by the government would before long be interpreted as treating the symptoms rather than the disease. I say this because the move raises a fundamental question vital to the resolution of the Warri conflict; so, considering that there are four kings in Warri, can there be such a thing as ‘Warri kingdom”?

When I first asked the above question on my Facebook page sometime in April, even before seeing Wado City ‘fever’, I received all kinds of batching from my Itsekiri friends and apologists for asking such a question. While I understood their sentiments, I also knew that it is a question that appeals to the collective conception of peace in Wari. Even our children will ask “why are there four kings in a space where one ethnic group is claiming overlordship, and others are identifying their primordial boundaries and occupation?” if we truly want to prevent further disquiet and future crisis, then we must answer this fundamental question. The government must provide the political will to show the world that it is not applying the doctrine of divide and rule in the oil-rich city of Warri. Fortunately, Wado City provides the template for lasting peace by advocating for the naming of Urhobo enclave, no more no less, of Warri as Wado City. This would mean that the Itsekiri can keep the name Warri, even if it is a colonial coinage; the Ijaw can have their Ogbi-Ijoh, and the Urhobo can have their Wado City. And this is where Dr Ejiro Umuero, the mastermind behind the Wado City initiative should be celebrated for providing light even in thick darkness. Alternatively, the government can establish three Local Government Councils for each of the ethnic nationalities in Warri. And unless we are set out to promote the primitive narrative of the feudal system in Warri, the Wado City template provides a perfect solution to the present and future unity of the ancestral ethnicities in Warri City.

Finally, we often talk about pace in Warri, but we fail to understand that peace is an end in itself and not a means. If we continue to seek peace as an end, and not through the means, then we can only guarantee peace in the short run; and before long, we will be faced with begging questions from a new generation that can only relate with peace from the purview of equity, justice and fairness. Therefore, if we want lasting peace, then we must build it on a tripartite stand of justice, equity and fairness; once we can establish this tripartite stand, then peace will settle in very naturally. To that extent, if Wado City proposal, which is basically about naming the Urhobo enclave of Warri as Wado City, fall within the ambit of equity, justice and fairness, as I would think it is, then the Delta State Government should take one final step in the conflict resolution by adopting the Wado City template and simply gazetting the Urhobo space in Warri as Wado City.

John Uwa (uwa.jmo@gmail.com, 08038815379). Writes from the University of Lagos.