‘I felt saddened’, Dokubo-Asari responds to Udekama allegations

The Amanyanabo of the Source, Da Amakiri Tubo, Alhaji Mujahid Abubakr Dokubo-Asari, has described as “sad, vexatious and provocative” allegations by the Udekama Council of Chiefs accusing Royal Fouche Security Services of operating as an “army of occupation” and engaging in land grabbing.

Speaking with reporters, Dokubo-Asari said he was particularly saddened by the allegations because, according to him, they sought to drag his name into a longstanding land dispute between neighbouring communities which predates his involvement.

“I felt saddened when I heard these allegations. I came back home after a long time away from Rivers State, only to read these vexatious allegations against me,” he said.

“This is a dispute that existed long before I was born. I was not a party to the court cases from which these allegations appear to have arisen, and I have never claimed ownership of the land in question.”

THE SCUTTLED OBUAMA 2020–2025 DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The monarch said the genesis of the present controversy could be traced to developments in Obuama in 2020.

According to him, Obuama has traditionally operated periodic development plans, including five-year plans, under which portions of community land are allocated to deserving members who apply for land for development.

He said that in 2020, portions of land were allocated for development along the corridor of the major road linking Tema, Okpo, Obuama, Degema and Abonema.

The road, he said, was constructed in 1973 during the administration of then Rivers State Military Governor, Commander Diete Spiff, with compensation paid to affected communities.

Dokubo-Asari said the communities along the corridor traditionally held land on both sides of the road.

According to him, when Obuama commenced preparations to implement its development plan, people from Usokun challenged the development, claiming ownership of the land and taking the matter to court.

“What is important is that there was no injunction stopping Obuama from developing the land. Yet Obuama chose to hold back because they wanted peace and wanted the matter resolved through the courts rather than through confrontation,” he said.

“THIS DISPUTE DID NOT START WITH ME”

Dokubo-Asari said the legal history demonstrated that the dispute was considerably older than the current allegations.

He cited DHC/76/CS/2020, HRH Chief Charles Sunday-Ugu VII & 3 Ors. v. Chief Kalada Samuel Harry & Anor., in which the High Court considered whether the claimants’ case was caught by estoppel/res judicata and whether they had established their title to the disputed land.

According to the judgment summary cited by him, the court found the claimants caught by earlier litigation, including a 1938 Native Court judgment in favour of Obuama, which had not been set aside.

The court also found that the claimants had failed to establish their title through the traditional evidence presented.

Dokubo-Asari argued that the judicial history made it wrong to portray him as the originator or principal actor in the land dispute.

“All the court cases instituted by the Udekama people have, according to the records before us, been adjudicated upon. Yet instead of pursuing the appropriate appellate process, new allegations continue to emerge,” he said.

“My question is simple: if this dispute was already before the courts and I was not a party to it, how have I now become the person responsible for the dispute?”

“WHERE IS THE OCCUPATION?”

The Amanyanabo also rejected the description of Royal Fouche Security Services as an “army of occupation.”

“Occupation of what?” he asked.

“Royal Fouche has provided security on land and waterways across communities in four Local Government Areas for approximately four years. Yet those making this allegation have not identified one portion of land that Royal Fouche has taken over.

“Where is the community that has been displaced? Where is the land that has been seized?”

He said security operations should not be confused with ownership or occupation of land.

“If Royal Fouche is truly an occupation army, why have other communities where it has operated not raised similar allegations?”

According to Dokubo-Asari, Royal Fouche has provided security along the Emohua/Kalabari corridor and surrounding waterways for more than four years without payment from the Rivers State Government or the four Local Government Areas concerned.

He said the organisation’s activities had helped reduce kidnapping and armed robbery along the corridor.

“You have to speak to the people to confirm the positive impact of my men in the discharge of their duties. Talk to people from the various communities. Talk to transporters. They will tell you their ugly experiences before and the level of safety and peace of mind they now enjoy on that route,” he said.

HIS HISTORICAL ACCOUNT

Dokubo-Asari also offered his own historical account of the origins of the Udekama people and their settlement in the area.

According to him, his forebear, King Amakiri I, whom he described as the founder of the modern Kalabari Kingdom, brought the people from Engenni in present-day Ahoada East Local Government Area and settled them among the Kalabari people.

He said the historical account passed down to him was that they lived on the fringes of the kingdom and served as buffers during periods of warfare, providing intelligence about impending attacks.

He also attributed aspects of their educational development to the support of the Kalabari people and the Baptist Convention.

“My concern is that people who were historically accommodated and supported should not now turn around and challenge the people who accommodated them and claim ownership of their land,” he said.

He stressed, however, that historical claims should be examined alongside documentary and judicial records rather than allowed to become a source of ethnic confrontation.

“LET THE LAW DETERMINE THE ISSUES”

Dokubo-Asari maintained that his position was ultimately about peace and due process.

“I have nothing to fear from lawful investigation. But serious allegations such as genocide, terrorism or occupation should not be used casually.

“If there is evidence of wrongdoing, let the evidence be produced and let the appropriate authorities investigate it.

“But do not take a longstanding dispute between neighbouring communities, attach my name to it when I was never a party to the litigation, and then create a completely different narrative around it.”

He said Obuama’s preference for peaceful coexistence and the judicial process should not be mistaken for weakness.

“We must separate the land dispute from the security question and allow evidence, the law and the courts to determine the issues.”

The monarch concluded by calling for an independent examination of the allegations.

“I welcome a judicial panel of inquiry by the State Government to investigate the allegation of land grabbing.”