Rivers State Rant

You need pap, don't worry.
We can proudly recommend this product from "Home of Splendour".
It's 100% natural, no additives.

Every Home needs this!
A taste you can't resist.
Order now!!!
100% natural, no additives.
Strongly recommended for every home.

OGONI DIALOGUE COMMITTEE, enough of the silence 🔕.
Speak up now!!!

PRESS STATEMENT.

THE SACK OF OVER 21,000 STAFF OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN RIVERS STATE TO FUND 2027 ELECTION AGAINST OPPOSITION POLITICAL PARTIES IS PENNY WISE, POUNDS FOOLISH.

The attention of the Initiative for Transparent Strategy and Good Leadership has been drawn to the sack of over 21,000 staff of Local Government Areas in Rivers State to enable the local government areas to raise a reasonable amount of money against the opposition political parties during the 2027 general election as ordered by the OVERLORD of the RAINBOW COALITION, using the recently conducted biometric as conducted by the Local Government Service Commission headed by one Mr. Israel Amadi as a yardstick.

The said sack was concluded on the 19th of August, 2026, where all the Local Government Chairmen, except Chidi LIoyd, were in attendance at the Justice Mary Odili Judicial Institute in Port Harcourt. Also, in attendance were all the HLGA, HPM, Treasurers, and all the Board Members of the Local Government Service Commission.

Although, some Local Government Chairmen frowned at the order because it would paint them black before their people, but they were ordered to pay all those affected this month salary since the voucher has been closed by 15th, but they should inform them that they were illegally employed. Hence, the Local Government Service Commission has sacked them and not the Chairmen.

The information available has it that over 2,300 persons were sacked in Obio/Akpor and Phalga, and the total staff of Local Government Areas in Rivers State has been reduced to 13,000 which is to take effect from September, 2026.

It is very unfortunate that all the deductions currently going on in the various LGAs in Rivers State which is been reserved for 2027 general election against the opposition political parties is not enough, the sack of legitimate staff who are genuine Rivers people is now the best of for RAINBOW COALITION.

We are also aware that the leadership of NULGE has been infiltrated by those who will sabotage their decision to shutdown Rivers State on Tuesday, 25th, of August 2026. If Nulge fails in their duty to shutdown Rivers State on Tuesday, 25th August 2026, then the leadership should step aside immediately

We wonder why, at this trying time that people are looking for how to feed twice a day, those in authorities are sacking people who were genuinely employed because of sponsoring election against another political party. What a shame.

We, hereby, direct the immediate reversal of the sack of legitimate 21,000 staff of Local Government Areas in Rivers State by the Local Government Service Commission and restore the status, rights, and privileges of those sacked with immediate effect

We advise Rivers people not to support political parties because of money, but to have hope that a better government will emerge 2027 which will restore all the lost glories, reabsorbed all those illegally sacked, provide and assure us of security, and better the lives of Rivers people and Nigerians at large.

C.C.E. Obujunwo
Spokesperson,
Initiative for Transparent Strategy and Good Leadership

21st August, 2026.

PRESS STATEMENT

AN URGENT APPEAL FOR TRANSPARENCY, JUSTICE, AND PRUDENCE IN THE OGONI DIALOGUE PROCESS

~ Rev. Msgr. Pius Kii, Ph.D, DSSRS (Member, Ogoni Dialogue Committee
18th August, 2026) ~

The Resumption of Oil Activities Must Not Precede the Resolution of the Fundamental Questions Before Ogoni

I consider it necessary, at this critical juncture, to draw the attention of the Federal Government, the leadership of the Ogoni Dialogue Committee (ODC), the people of Ogoni and the Nigerian public to matters of urgent concern regarding the ongoing process for the resumption of oil activities in Ogoniland.

I do so not in opposition to the Federal Government’s initiative, not in opposition to the resumption of oil production in Ogoniland, and certainly not in opposition to the leadership being provided to the process by the National Security Adviser, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu.

On the contrary, I believe that the opportunity presently before us is historic and should be protected.

My concern is the manner in which the process is being conducted and the direction in which it appears to be moving.

I believe that, unless some of these concerns are urgently addressed, we may inadvertently repeat some of the very mistakes that have produced mistrust, alienation and conflict in Ogoniland in the past.

THIS IS NOT A CALL TO ABANDON THE PROCESS

Let me make my position absolutely clear.

I am not opposed to the resumption of oil activities in Ogoniland.

I recognise that oil production has historically been an important part of Nigeria’s economic development and that the return of responsible oil activities, under an arrangement that adequately protects the interests of the Ogoni people, could provide opportunities for development, employment, infrastructure and economic empowerment.

I also recognise and respect the role of the National Security Adviser, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, in leading the Federal Government’s effort to bring the various interests together.

My concern is therefore not whether there should be dialogue.

My concern is whether the dialogue is sufficiently transparent, and properly sequenced to produce an outcome that the Ogoni people can genuinely own.

A PROCESS THAT APPEARS TOO SECRETIVE

From the outset, there has been a disturbing tendency to conduct matters of profound public consequence in a manner that appears deliberately sub secreto.

The issues under consideration do not belong to a few individuals sitting around a negotiating table. They concern the land, resources, rights, environment, political future and economic destiny of an entire people.

The people of Ogoni therefore have a legitimate right to know what is being negotiated in their name and the principles upon which decisions affecting their future are being reached.

My concern has become even more urgent because negotiations are still underway while oil-related activities have already commenced in some parts of Ogoniland, and licences have reportedly been issued to certain companies before the negotiating process has been concluded.

When I questioned this approach, I was told, in substance, that after the negotiations were concluded, the companies would subsequently be invited to negotiate equity participation with the Ogoni people.

I remain deeply unconvinced by that approach.

If equity participation, community ownership, host-community benefits and other fundamental protections are intended to form part of the final arrangement, they ought to be established before the principal decisions are taken and not after the fact.

There is a fundamental principle at stake here.

You cannot conclude a deal today and expect a law enacted tomorrow to retrospectively confer rights or obligations upon an agreement that has already been concluded.

Laws are generally prospective, not retroactive.

The sequence matters.

If the Ogoni people are to have meaningful participation in the economic benefits arising from the return of oil activities, such participation must be negotiated and secured as part of the process itself.

Otherwise, there is a real danger that Ogoni will eventually be confronted with a fait accompli.

WHY ARE WE IN SUCH A HURRY?

I have repeatedly asked a simple question:

It took us almost 33 years to get to this point. Why must we now rush the process?

If the answer is that elections are approaching, then I respectfully submit that this would be an inadequate reason to compromise the quality of an agreement that may affect Ogoni for generations.

The negotiation is with the Nigerian state.

Governments will come and go.

Those who constitute governments will change.

But Ogoni will remain. Nigeria will remain. The oil beneath Ogoni soil will remain.

We therefore have a responsibility to think beyond the electoral calendar and beyond the tenure of particular political office holders.

What Ogoni requires is not merely a quick agreement.

Ogoni requires the right agreement.

THE BORi STATE DEMAND CANNOT BE PUSHED ASIDE

Perhaps my greatest concern relates to the manner in which one of the most significant demands expressed during the town hall consultations appears to have been treated.

The demand for the creation of Bori State was repeatedly articulated by the people.

That demand cannot be understood merely as another request for a new state.

It must be understood against the historical background of Ogoni.

It is inseparable from the sacrifices made during the non-violent struggle led by Ken Saro-Wiwa and other Ogoni leaders, the military occupation that followed, the killing and ex*****on of Ogoni leaders, the destruction of communities and the enormous suffering inflicted upon our people.

It is also inseparable from the contribution of Ogoni oil to the Nigerian economy from the 1930s until the cessation of oil production more than three decades ago.

For many Ogoni people, therefore, Bori State represents an aspiration for political recognition, justice and compensation for a people who have paid an extraordinary price in the history of Nigeria’s oil development.

It is therefore deeply troubling that this demand, which featured prominently in the consultations with the people, has apparently been pushed down to the seventh position in the negotiating priorities.

I believe this deserves urgent reconsideration.

Who determined that a demand so central to the aspirations expressed by the people should be relegated in this manner?

The people should not be consulted and then have their principal demands subsequently rearranged according to the preferences of negotiators.

QUICK WINS MUST NOT CREATE NEW GRIEVANCES

I am equally concerned about the manner in which the so-called “quick-win” or “low-hanging-fruit” projects have been identified and distributed.

If these projects are intended to demonstrate the benefits of the process and rebuild confidence, then their distribution must be transparent, equitable and demonstrably fair.

Yet, to my knowledge, there is presently nothing situated in Babbe Kingdom under this programme—not a school, not a hospital and no comparable project.

This is not merely a question of one kingdom wanting its share.

It raises a larger question about the criteria being used to determine which communities receive what projects and why.

A process designed to heal historical grievances must not inadvertently create new ones. For instance, it is difficult to understand how a programme intended to demonstrate meaningful intervention in Ogoni could proceed without including a road to Bane, the hometown of the late Ken Saro-Wiwa, whose name and legacy remain inseparably connected with the Ogoni struggle. The omission is not merely a question of infrastructure; it speaks to the broader question of whether the projects were conceived from a sufficiently comprehensive understanding of Ogoni’s history, geography and developmental aspirations.

The same concern arises with the hospitals reportedly selected for renovation. These are largely existing, old health facilities constructed in the past. Renovating such facilities may provide some immediate relief, but it falls considerably short of the kind of modern, properly equipped healthcare infrastructure that the people require and deserve. The standard should not simply be to refurbish old structures, but to ask what kind of healthcare facilities are necessary for a modern and economically productive Ogoni. This is particularly striking when one considers the scale and sophistication of healthcare infrastructure that contemporary institutions and entities, including the NNPC, are capable of establishing.

There is also considerable uncertainty surrounding the proposed renovation of selected secondary schools. Although the renovation of some schools was initially included among the proposed interventions, there now appears to be little or no clarity about what has happened to that component. This is deeply troubling because education cannot be treated as an incidental component of development.

Indeed, how do we prepare to empower a people economically and socially when there is consequential neglect of the foundational educational institutions upon which that empowerment must rest? You cannot meaningfully speak of empowering the Ogoni people while leaving their children to receive education in inadequate and deteriorating school environments. Roads, hospitals and other infrastructure are important, but sustainable empowerment requires investment in human capital, and human capital begins with quality primary and secondary education.

The concern, therefore, is not that these projects are unnecessary. Rather, the concern is that they appear insufficiently ambitious, insufficiently integrated and, in some instances, uncertain in their implementation. Ogoni needs more than projects that can be presented as quick wins. It needs a coherent developmental framework that connects infrastructure, education, healthcare, environmental restoration, economic opportunity and the long-term empowerment of its people.


MY HISTORY OF ENGAGEMENT WITH THE OGONI QUESTION

I make these observations with a particular sense of responsibility because my engagement with the Ogoni question did not begin with my appointment to the Ogoni Dialogue Committee.
During the years of military occupation, when access to Ogoniland was severely restricted and much of what was happening inside our communities was invisible to the outside world, I conducted journalists from the BBC, CNN and The New York Times through Ogoniland, enabling them to see the situation from within and to tell the story of Ogoni oppression directly from the communities affected.

I also wrote to

During the bleak years of the Abacha regime, I conducted the Honourable Flora MacDonald, the then Foreign Affairs Minister of Canada and the Canadian High Commissioner, Mr Jerry Olsen, around Ogoniland drawing attention to the plight of Ogoni and facilitated their meetings and interviews with victims of r**e, brutality and other forms of violence.

Those engagements helped bring the reality of the Ogoni tragedy to international attention and contributed to the circumstances that eventually led to the resettlement of some Ogoni people outside the country.

I also assisted the process associated with Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah, which contributed to the chain of initiatives that eventually produced the UNEP assessment of Ogoniland and subsequently the establishment of HYPREP, which is now responsible for environmental remediation.

I served as Secretary of the Port Harcourt Diocesan Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Committee, established by the late Bishop Alexius Makozi with funding support from the European Union, to assist in the rehabilitation and resettlement of victims of the Ogoni-Andoni crisis.

I do not recount these things to claim exclusive ownership of the Ogoni struggle. Far from it.

Many Ogoni men and women made sacrifices far greater than mine. Many Nigerians and international friends of Ogoni also contributed significantly to the struggle.

I mention my own modest contribution for one reason:

Having been involved in the Ogoni question through some of its darkest moments, I cannot now remain silent if I genuinely believe that the present process is moving in a direction that could prejudice the long-term interests of our people.

THE KEN SARO-WIWA QUESTION

Even during the present process, I considered it necessary to draw the attention of the President to an important unresolved aspect of the historical injustice suffered by Ogoni.

I therefore addressed a private memorandum to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu through the Office of the National Security Adviser, drawing attention to the need to address the question of the pardon of Ken Saro-Wiwa and appropriate national honour for the slain Ogoni leaders.

I am grateful that the President responded positively and adequately attended to this matter.

That response demonstrated that where the Government is presented with a genuine historical grievance, it can listen and act.

It is precisely because of that experience that I believe the present concerns should also be heard.

THIS MUST NOT BECOME A PROCESS FOR A FEW BUSINESS INTERESTS

There is growing concern among many people that the urgency being attached to the process may be driven by interests that go beyond the legitimate objective of returning oil production to Ogoniland.

I deliberately choose my words carefully.

I am not accusing any individual of criminal conduct.

But the combination of limited transparency, ongoing negotiations, activities already commencing in parts of Ogoniland, licences reportedly being issued before the completion of the negotiations, and the relegation of major demands of the people naturally creates questions that deserve clear answers.

After the sacrifices made by the Ogoni people and after the enormous efforts over decades to bring us to this point, we cannot allow the process to become skewed towards predetermined conclusions that principally serve the interests of a few business-minded individuals.

The process must serve Ogoni first.


AN URGENT APPEAL

I therefore appeal to:

* His Excellency, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, to ensure that the historic opportunity before the Federal Government is not diminished by haste or inadequate consultation;
* The National Security Adviser, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, to ensure that the dialogue remains transparent, balanced and sufficiently inclusive;
* The leadership of the Ogoni Dialogue Committee, to open up the process sufficiently to enable the people to understand and interrogate the fundamental issues being negotiated in their name;
* The Ogoni people and their traditional and community leadership, to remain vigilant and ensure that no agreement concerning the future of Ogoniland is concluded without adequate consultation and transparency.

I believe it is still possible to correct the course of the process.

This is not a call to abandon the negotiations.

It is a call to slow down where necessary, open up the process, listen again to the people and ensure that no irreversible decisions are taken before the fundamental questions are settled.

RESUMPTION MUST NOT MEAN SURRENDER

I remain firmly of the view that oil activities can resume in Ogoniland.

But the resumption must be founded upon justice, transparency, environmental responsibility, meaningful participation and equitable benefit.

Resumption must not mean surrender.

Development must not become another name for dispossession.

Dialogue must not become a mechanism through which decisions are made first and explained to the people afterwards.

And quick results must never be allowed to take precedence over a durable settlement.

The Ogoni people have already paid an enormous price.

They have waited for more than three decades.

We can wait a little longer to get it right.

The oil will still be there.

The Nigerian state will still be there.

Ogoni will still be there.

What we must ensure is that when oil finally returns to Ogoniland, it returns under an arrangement that future generations of Ogoni people will regard not as another betrayal, but as the beginning of a new and just chapter in our history.

This is therefore an urgent appeal—not to stop the process, but to get it right.

Ogoni deserves justice.

Ogoni deserves transparency.

Ogoni deserves a voice in decisions about its future.

And Ogoni deserves an agreement that will stand the test of history.

WHO IS AFTER TIMI SYLVA?

The same shadowy forces that once sought to criminalize Sylva politically now appear to have reinvented themselves as fiscal crusaders. There must undoubtedly be an explanation for this cinematic transition—from rumour to reinvention, from one carefully scripted accusation to another.