OPEN RESPONSE TO THE OPEN LETTER ON WARRI DELINEATION SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: DELINEATION IS ABOUT REPRESENTATION, NOT HISTORICAL DISTORTION
OPEN RESPONSE TO THE OPEN LETTER ON WARRI DELINEATION
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: DELINEATION IS ABOUT REPRESENTATION, NOT HISTORICAL DISTORTION
10th June. 2026
We have carefully read the open letter circulated regarding the Warri ward delineation exercise. While we welcome every call for peace and coexistence, we must firmly reject attempts to distort the true legal and constitutional basis of the current delineation process.
Let the facts be clear.
First, ward delineation is not an ethnic negotiation, it is a constitutional obligation. The current process did not emerge from political agitation alone. It arose from a Supreme Court judgment directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to conduct a fresh delineation exercise in Warri Federal Constituency in line with constitutional realities and fair representation. Court judgments are binding, not optional.
Section 287(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) is explicit: all authorities and persons must obey decisions of the Supreme Court. The issue before Nigerians is therefore simple, will the rule of law prevail or will political pressure override constitutional order?
Second, delineation does not confer land ownership and nobody has claimed otherwise. The repeated argument that delineation is an attempt to annex territory misunderstands the purpose of electoral representation. Electoral wards are created to ensure fair political participation based on existing communities, settlements and population realities. Representation and traditional institutions are different matters.
Third, history in Warri is complex and cannot be reduced to one narrative. Colonial records, administrative reports, land disputes and judicial proceedings over decades reflect overlapping histories, coexistence, migration, settlement and disputes among several communities in the Warri axis. Selective quotations cannot substitute for the full historical record.
Fourth, the lawful path remains open to everyone. In a constitutional democracy, any stakeholder dissatisfied with the delineation outcome retains the right to challenge it through lawful judicial channels. That is the essence of the rule of law.
We agree on one important principle, peace matters. But peace cannot rest on indefinite delay or the suspension of lawful processes. Peace is strongest when justice is transparent, institutions are respected and constitutional decisions are implemented fairly.
The message remains straightforward:
Implement the lawful delineation process in accordance with the Constitution and the judgment of the Supreme Court. Respect legal institutions. Preserve peace through justice and dialogue.
Warri’s future must be built not on fear, accusations or historical absolutism but on fairness, coexistence and constitutional order. This approach is forceful, public-facing and much harder for opponents or media to dismiss because it leans on law and process rather than escalation.
Signed:
Elder, Samuel David Pereware
