….TO THE CLAIM BY CHIEF EMMANUEL ORITSEJOLOMI UDUAGHAN THAT SAPELE TOWN IS NOT AN OKPE {URHOBO} COMMUNITY
INTRODUCTION
The Urhobo Progress Union {UPU}, the apex socio-cultural organisation of the Urhobo Nation worldwide, has taken cognisance of statements credited to Chief Emmanuel Oritsejolomi Uduaghan in a letter dated 24 December 2025 and addressed to the Honourable Minister of Environment, Abuja, wherein he asserted, inter alia, that “Sapele was never an Okpe community” and that “the only existing communities known in Sapele from time immemorial are all Itsekiri communities.”
Given the gravity of these assertions and their potential to distort history, inflame ethnic sentiments, and undermine peaceful coexistence, the UPU finds it necessary to issue this comprehensive rejoinder to set the record straight with clarity, accuracy, and responsibility.
ON THE INDIGENOUS AND EXCLUSIVE OKPE STATUS OF SAPELE
In the actual, historical, and customary sense, Sapele is exclusively an indigenous Okpe community.
This fact is established by:
- Aboriginal settlement and continuous occupation
- Ancestral land ownership
- Customary governance and authority
- Indigenous oral history preserved across generations
The Okpe people are the first settlers, original landowners, and aboriginal inhabitants of Sapele. Their ownership of Sapele land did not arise from colonial allocation, commercial enterprise, or political convenience; it arose from ancestry and primordial settlement, which remain the strongest foundation of indigenous title under African customary law.
The claim that Sapele was “never an Okpe community” is therefore historically false and fundamentally untenable.
ON THE NATURE OF ITSEKIRI PRESENCE IN SAPELE
The presence of Itsekiri people in Sapele is not disputed, but the basis of that presence is often deliberately misrepresented.
Historically, Itsekiri groups migrated into Sapele as:
- Refugees, fleeing conflicts and instability in the coastal axis
- Traders, attracted by Sapele’s emergence as a major Okpe commercial centre
- Fishermen, settling along riverine areas with the consent and tolerance of Okpe landowners
These migrations occurred within Okpe territory and under Okpe customary authority. At no point did such migration confer:
- Founding rights
- Aboriginal ownership
- Political sovereignty
- Traditional supremacy over Sapele
Migration, irrespective of duration or economic success, does not transform settlers into indigenes, nor does it extinguish the rights of aboriginal owners.
ON HOSPITALITY AND THE MISINTERPRETATION OF COEXISTENCE
The Okpe people, in keeping with Urhobo cultural values, extended hospitality, protection, and economic accommodation to migrant communities in Sapele. This hospitality enabled peaceful coexistence and commercial growth in what later became a cosmopolitan town.
However, such coexistence must not be misconstrued, whether innocently or deliberately, as a transfer of ownership or authority.
Hospitality is not abdication.
Settlement is not indigeneity.
Commercial prominence is not sovereignty.
ON THE FALSE CLAIM OF “TIME IMMEMORIAL” ITSEKIRI OWNERSHIP
Chief Uduaghan’s assertion that Itsekiri communities existed in Sapele “from time immemorial” is historically indefensible.
Indigenous ownership is determined by first settlement and ancestral continuity, both of which belong exclusively to the Okpe people in Sapele. No credible oral tradition, indigenous account, or binding historical record establishes the Itsekiri as original settlers or aboriginal owners of Sapele.
Claims to the contrary amount to historical revisionism, aimed at elevating migrant presence above indigenous reality.
ON THE MISUSE OF COLONIAL INTELLIGENCE REPORTS
The selective reliance on the 1930 Intelligence Report on the Okpe Sobo Clan by L.E.H. Fellows is misleading.
Colonial intelligence reports were administrative instruments compiled for governance convenience. They were never exhaustive declarations of indigenous land ownership, nor were they designed to extinguish pre-colonial customary rights.
The listing of Okpe settlements such as Amukpe, Elume, Orerokpe, and Gbukurusu does not exclude Sapele from Okpe territory. Rather, it reflects the internal administrative and settlement diversity of Okpe Kingdom, within which Sapele functioned as a major commercial and administrative centre.
Colonial omission does not negate indigenous ownership.
ON THE MISREPRESENTATION OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
The reference to Suit No. S/23/74: Washi Ogodo & Sapele Okpe Communal Land Trustees & Ors as proof that “there is nothing like Sapele Okpe Community Lands” is a distortion of judicial reasoning.
Courts adjudicate on specific claims before them; they do not pronounce sweeping historical absolutes unless directly pleaded and proven. No Nigerian court has ever declared Sapele to be exclusively Itsekiri land or denied the aboriginal ownership of Sapele by the Okpe people.
Judicial outcomes must not be selectively extracted to advance claims that the courts never made.
ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARIES AND LAND OWNERSHIP
Local Government Areas are political and administrative creations. They do not create, transfer, or extinguish indigenous land rights. Ownership of land derives from ancestry, settlement, and customary law, not from administrative boundaries.
Any attempt to rely on LGA configurations to justify exclusive ethnic ownership is legally flawed and historically unsound.
ON THE DANGERS OF HISTORICAL DISTORTION
The portrayal of Sapele as exclusively Itsekiri-owned territory poses a serious threat to historical truth and inter-ethnic harmony.
Sapele’s cosmopolitan character was built upon a foundation of Okpe indigeneity and hospitality. Attempts to erase or diminish that foundation undermine peaceful coexistence and mutual respect.
History must be preserved, not repackaged.
STERN WARNING AND FINAL CAUTION
The Urhobo Nation has, from time immemorial, demonstrated remarkable tolerance, generosity, and hospitality toward non-indigenous groups resident within its ancestral territories, including the Itsekiri people in Sapele. This goodwill has enabled peaceful coexistence, economic prosperity, and communal stability over the years.
However, hospitality must not be abused, and leniency must not be mistaken for weakness.
Any continued attempt by Itsekiri elements to deny Okpe indigeneity, rewrite the history of Sapele, or assert ownership over any part of Sapele land amounts to a deliberate provocation and an abuse of the very tolerance that has sustained peaceful coexistence.
The Urhobo Nation cannot be expected to perpetually “feed those who bite the breast that has nourished them.”
Should these historical distortions and ownership claims persist, the Urhobo Progress Union will be left with no option but to withdraw its customary leniency and hospitality and to reconsider the continued acceptance of such elements within Okpe {Urhobo} territory, in line with lawful, constitutional, and communal mechanisms available to indigenous peoples for the protection of their heritage.
This warning is issued in the interest of peace, with the sincere hope that reason, restraint, and respect for history will prevail.
CONCLUSION
The Urhobo Progress Union hereby restates its position clearly and unequivocally:
- Sapele is exclusively an indigenous Okpe community by origin, history, and customary law.
- The Okpe people are the aboriginal owners of Sapele land.
- The Itsekiri presence in Sapele resulted from migration as refugees, traders, and fishermen.
- Such migration confers no ownership, indigeneity, or traditional supremacy.
- Claims of exclusive Itsekiri ownership of Sapele are historically unfounded and legally unsustainable.
The UPU remains committed to peaceful coexistence, justice, and inter-ethnic harmony, but peace must be anchored on truth, not historical distortion.
Issued by:
Comr. Dr. Prince Oghenevwairhe Kehinde Taiga,
National Publicity Secretary
Urhobo Progress Union {UPU}
Date: 6th January 2026
Leave a Reply