Misleading Claims, False Documents Dominate Ogwashi-Uku Commission Of Inquiry Proceedings

The hearing of the Delta State Commission of Inquiry into the Obiship and land matters in Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom took a dramatic turn today, as key witnesses and submissions exposed a series of falsehoods and misrepresentations.

The Commission, established by the Delta State Government, is tasked with resolving disputes surrounding the Obiship and land administration in Ogwashi-Uku Kingdom. Lawyers representing the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku, led by Chike Onyemenam, SAN, clarified that the Obi’s submission was not a petition against any individual or group but rather a comprehensive response to the various petitions leveled against the Obi and the Kingdom.

Onyemenam reiterated that existing legal judgments, government gazettes, and other official documents had already established that all land in Ogwashi-Uku is vested in the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku. He further highlighted the illegal actions of self-proclaimed leaders in Otulu and Olu-Odu, who had installed themselves as traditional rulers in violation of Delta State Chieftaincy laws. The panel agreed with this position, resulting in the withdrawal of the Obi’s initial submission, which was deemed unnecessary.

ALSO READ: Delta Ex-Lawmaker Oharisi Dissociates Self From Alleged NDDC Budget/Contract Story

### False Claims of Chieftaincy and Autonomy

In a notable development, Barrister Francis Okolie, representing Mr. Mike Nwaukoni, faced cross-examination over claims that his client is the Iyase (traditional prime minister) of Ogwashi-Uku. Okolie confirmed that Nwaukoni was allegedly installed in 2004 but was confronted with official documents from the Directorate of Chieftaincy Affairs that did not list Nwaukoni as Iyase. Okolie refused to read the document aloud when asked.

Lawyers for the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku also presented a 1996 judgment by the former Chief Judge of Delta State, Hon. Z.A. Smith. The judgment explicitly stated that only the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku could confer chieftaincy titles within the Kingdom and reaffirmed that all land in Ogwashi-Uku is under the Obi’s jurisdiction.

### Misleading Documents and Claims of Conviction

Prince Nathan Okonjo, another witness, claimed before the panel that he was the rightful Obi of Ogwashi-Uku. However, under cross-examination by Onyemenam SAN, he admitted to losing a previous lawsuit challenging the late father of the current Obi and acknowledged that his appeal on the matter is pending before the Court of Appeal, with the next hearing scheduled for January 2025.

Prince Okonjo also faced questions about his self-styled title as Obi, contrary to state Chieftaincy laws, but he declined to answer. Attempts were made to use unverified documents to allege a criminal conviction against the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku. However, lawyers for the Obi clarified that these documents merely pertained to bail forfeiture and bond-related matters, with no evidence of any criminal conviction.

This incident mirrors a similar episode involving members of the so-called Otulu Autonomous Community. They had earlier claimed to possess a Supreme Court judgment affirming their autonomy, which was later revealed to be a judgment over a land dispute resolved in favor of the Obi of Ogwashi-Uku.

### Adjournment and Upcoming Petitions

The panel adjourned proceedings to tomorrow, where it will consider new petitions involving disputes within the Azungwu and Azagba Ogwashi-Uku quarters of the Kingdom.

As the inquiry continues, the hearings underscore the importance of separating fact from fiction to uphold justice and ensure the preservation of Ogwashi-Uku’s traditional and legal structures.