REBUTTAL PRESS STATEMENT
RE: IHF Response to Baseless Claims by the Self-Acclaimed Concerned Indigenous Stakeholders of Warri Federal Constituency: Affirming Historical and Legal Facts on Itsekiri Ownership
June 27, 2025
The leadership of Itsekiri Historical Front find it necessary to respond to the press statement issued by the so-called Concerned Indigenous Stakeholders of Warri Federal Constituency, led by Comr. Miebi Thomp, is a grotesque monument to intellectual bankruptcy, historical amnesia, and ethnic provocation so steeped in brainless delusion that it defies reason. This group, mired in a cesspool of abject illiteracy, has woven a tapestry of baseless assertions, inflammatory rhetoric, and thinly veiled threats of violence in a futile attempt to challenge the indisputable, millennial ownership of Warri by the Itsekiri people. Their reliance on crude propaganda, fraudulent misrepresentations, and illegal occupation of lands they have no claim to is a laughable display of ignorance that would embarrass even the most uneducated observer. Violence does not confer ownership, and their hallucinatory distortions—born of a self-inflicted fog of delusion—will never erase the truth.
This exhaustive, meticulously documented rebuttal, spanning over 1,000 years of historical, demographic, legal, and scholarly evidence, reaffirms the Itsekiri’s sovereign ownership of Warri and exposes the Ijaw and Urhobo claims—particularly those of Ogbe-Ijoh, Gbaramatu, and Agbassa—as the ramblings of customary tenants lost in a quagmire of self-deception. Comr. Miebi Thomp and his cohort, so utterly devoid of the ability to read, research, or accept truth, must enroll in basic education to escape the shackles of their own delusions. Their failure to comprehend primary historical documents, legal precedents, and scholarly works is a testament to their brainless refusal to engage with reality. Crafted to fill three pages of newspaper space, this publication leaves no stone unturned in dismantling their illiterate narrative and exposing their claims as a pathetic attempt to rewrite a history they cannot fathom.
ITSEKIRI OWNERSHIP: A MILLENNIAL LEGACY ANCHORED IN HISTORY AND LAW
The Itsekiri’s ownership of Warri is an unassailable fact, forged over more than 1,000 years of continuous habitation and cemented by the establishment of the Kingdom of Warri in 1480 by Olu Ginuwa, a prince of the Benin Kingdom. For over 548 years, the Kingdom of Warri (Iwere) has stood as a beacon of Itsekiri sovereignty, recognized by colonial powers, Nigerian courts, and scholarly authorities across centuries. Long before the kingdom’s founding, Yoruba-speaking groups—Ijebu, Mahin/Ilaje, Ugbos, and Ife—inhabited the area now known as Warri Federal Constituency for over 300 years, laying the cultural and territorial foundation for the Itsekiri’s ethnogenesis. These pre-1480 settlers, precursors to the Itsekiri, established a deep-rooted presence that blended Yoruba and Edo influences, as documented by P. C. Lloyd, who notes the Itsekiri’s use of “Iwere” (Warri) to refer to themselves and their capital, Ode-Itsekiri.
The name “Warri” is a British corruption of “Iwere,” as confirmed by Consul John Beecroft and Richard Burton in 1862, who sailed to the “Renowned City of Wari,” identifying it as the “Kingdom of Wari or Waree.” And Crowder’s The Story of Nigeria identified it as the “Itsekiri State of Warri”. Professor Obaro Ikime further traces “Warri” to the Itsekiri’s self-designation, obliterating any Ijaw or Urhobo claim to naming rights. John Sagay reinforces this, noting that “Warre” was a British variant of “Iwere,” linked to the Itsekiri’s homeland. Historical records, including the Southern Nigeria Civil Service Handbook (1904) and Warri Urban District Council records (1955), affirm Itsekiri control over Warri, encompassing areas like Ogbe-Ijoh, Gbaramatu, and Agbassa, where Ijaws and Urhobos reside as customary tenants.
Over 40 court cases from 1925 to 1973, 6 of which specifically addressed ownership, consistently upheld the Itsekiri’s radical title, with the Olu of Warri or Itsekiri Communal Land Trustees as the legal overlords. These rulings, enshrined in the Communal Land Rights (Vesting in Trustees) Law 1958, vest Warri lands in the Itsekiri under the Olu’s overlordship. Demographic data underscores this dominance: the 1963 Nigerian census recorded Itsekiris as 64% of Warri’s population (83,000), with Ogbe-Ijoh Ijaws at 4.1% (5,599), Gbaramatu Ijaws at 4.2% (6,145), and Agbassa Urhobos as a minority. By 1980, the Nigerian Institute of Social and Economic Research estimated Itsekiris at 270,000, dwarfing Ijaw and Urhobo populations. These figures expose the Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ minority status as migrants and tenants, not indigenous owners, in a region where Itsekiri presence spans over a millennium.
PRE-FOUNDING YORUBA PRESENCE AND ITSEKIRI ROOTS
The Itsekiri’s presence in Warri predates the Kingdom of Warri by centuries, with Yoruba-speaking groups—Ijebu, Mahin/Ilaje, Ugbos, and Ife—settling the region over 1,000 years ago, long before the Ijaws or Urhobos arrived. These groups, the ancestral bedrock of the Itsekiri, established a cultural and territorial foundation that evolved into the Itsekiri identity, blending Yoruba and Edo influences. P. C. Lloyd notes that the Itsekiri call themselves “Iwere,” a term synonymous with Warri, which the Urhobos called “Irhobo” (those who float on the water) and the Ijaws called “Selemo.” The British variant “Warri” emerged from “Iwere,” as documented by Beecroft and Burton, and reinforced by Sagay. The term “Ogbe-Ijoh” derives from the Itsekiri’s “Ogbe,” the royal quarters in Ode-Itsekiri, later adopted by Ijaw settlers to nickname their settlement, mirroring the Urhobo’s “Ogbe-Sobo” for Aladja. This linguistic evidence, rooted in Itsekiri tradition, obliterates the Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ delusional claims of indigeneity, revealing their brainless attempt to rewrite a history they cannot comprehend.
The Itsekiri’s cultural connections to Yoruba, Igala, and Benin, and their adoption of European influences through trade, further underscore their historical depth and adaptability. Their societal structure, once divided into Oton-Olu (royals), Omajaja (freeborn), and Eru/Ubi-Edo (slaves none itsekiri’s), was reformed by the Olu to eliminate distinctions, ensuring equality and unity. The Urhobos’ and Ijaws’ misuse of terms like “omajaja” as insults reflects their ignorance of Itsekiri culture and their pathetic attempt to demean a people whose history dwarfs their own.
THE OGBE-IJOH, GBARAMATU, AND AGBASSA: MIGRANTS AND TENANTS
The Ijaws of Ogbe-Ijoh and Gbaramatu, and the Urhobos of Agbassa, are historically documented as migrants and customary tenants under the Olu of Warri. P. C. Lloyd’s description of Warri Division (1520 square miles, now Warri Local Government Area) notes that it is co-terminous with Itsekiri territory, with Ijaw settlements (Ogbe-Ijoh, Gbaramatu, Egbeoma) and Urhobo settlements (Agbassa) as peripheral groups. Assistant District Officer R. B. Kerr’s 1931 report explicitly states that the Ogbe-Ijoh, comprising five villages (Ogbe-Ijoh, Isaba, Diebiri, Ijansa, Jelejele) with an estimated population of 17,500, expressly chose to remain under Itsekiri Local Administration, having “lost touch” with their Operemor roots in Ekeremu. The Gbaramatu trace their origins to the Gbaran clan in Bayelsa, and Agbassa Urhobos trace their roots from Agbarha-Otor in Ughelli. All are recognized as settlers under Itsekiri overlordship, with no pre-1480 presence in Warri, unlike the Yoruba groups who inhabited the area for over 1,000 years.
J. C. Anene situates the Ijaw homeland in the Niger Delta south of Abo, with Ogbe-Ijoh linked to the Operemor clan and Gbaramatu to the Gbaran clan of Bayelsa. Their settlements in Warri, often fishing camps or trading outposts, emerged under Itsekiri permission. In a 1934 land dispute (*Saba v. Ogbe-Sobo*), Saba Ijaw witnesses, including Dumokoromo and Omisikuta, testified before Justice Bartley that their ancestors found no one on the land except the Olu of Warri, who owned the river and land. They acknowledged settling with the Olu’s permission and giving a daughter, Emaye, in marriage to him for protection, as was customary. Justice Bartley ruled in favor of the Saba, recognizing the Olu’s overlordship, confirming their tenant status. Similarly, *Ometan v. Chief Dore Numa (1926)* established Agbassa Urhobos as customary tenants, with no claim to radical title.
The Ogbe-Ijoh’s 1972 claim to a Mid-Western State Government panel that they originated from Ekeremu and first settled at the site of present-day Warri is a brainless fabrication, unsupported by evidence. They provided no reason for leaving this “solid land” or for naming Warri or Ogbe-Ijoh, exposing their claims as delusional. The Ogbe-Ijoh waterfront in Warri township, often cited by Ijaws, was leased to the government in 1906 by Itsekiri Chiefs Dore Numa and Ogbe, acting on behalf of the Itsekiri people and as representatives of the Olu of Warri, for £100 annually for 99 years, after Ijaw fish-sellers were evicted following a 1895 quit notice. After Chief Dore’s death, Itsekiri chiefs Skinn, Omagbemi, and Gbenebitse were substituted in land cases, continuing to represent Itsekiri interests. If, as the Ijaws claim, Dore acted solely as a British agent, why were Itsekiri chiefs allowed to take over these cases? This undeniable fact exposes the Ijaws’ brainless ignorance and their pathetic attempt to distort a clear historical record. The Ijaws’ failure to contest this lease or join the Agbassa Urhobo’s 1926 case against Chief Dore, which included the Ogbe-Ijoh waterfront, underscores their lack of legal title. Their 1933 petition for the return of this land, decades after eviction, was ignored, as courts consistently recognized Itsekiri ownership.
LEGAL PRECEDENTS: AN IRONCLAD CASE FOR ITSEKIRI OWNERSHIP
The Itsekiri’s ownership of Warri, encompassing areas occupied by Ogbe-Ijoh, Gbaramatu, and Agbassa, is cemented by over 40 court cases from 1925 to 1973, 6 of which specifically addressed Warri ownership, all decisively won by the Itsekiri. These rulings, enshrined in the Communal Land Rights (Vesting in Trustees) Law 1958, vest Warri lands in the Itsekiri Communal Land Trustees under the Olu’s overlordship. Key cases include:
– Ogegede v. Chief Dore Numa (1925): Agbassa Urhobos sought rents for leased land but were dismissed by the Supreme Court, with no evidence of ownership.
– Ometan v. Chief Dore Numa (1926): Agbassa Urhobos claimed title over Warri lands but were ruled customary tenants under Itsekiri overlordship. Appeals in 1931 and 1933 upheld this.
– Chief Apoh v. Perememighan (1928): An Itsekiri chief claimed Aruteghan Creek and surrounding lands, with the Native Court, including an Ijaw member, Chief Buluku of Kiagbodo, affirming Itsekiri ownership.
– Chief Apoh and Chief Okotie v. Pere of Saba (1938): The court restrained Ijaws from fishing or using lands like Ofulu, Utonileme, Utongboro, and Krokoto without Itsekiri permission, confirming their tenant status.
– Eyin Pessu, Akowe Apoh, and Olu of Warri v. Brigbe and Others (Suit W/116/56, 1956): Justice Obaseki granted possessory title to Itsekiri plaintiffs and radical title to the Olu for Aruteghan Creek and surrounding lands. The Supreme Court dismissed the Ijaw appeal in 1967 (SC/450/65).
– Chief Isuokumo Oloiki and Others v. Itsekiri Communal Land Trustees (Suit W/148/56, 1956): Ijaws claimed title to most of Warri Division but discontinued the suit, with Justice Rhodes Vivour barring future claims. The Supreme Court dismissed their appeal on April 24, 1967.
– Gbaramatu Cases (1946, 1962, 1973): Courts consistently ruled Ijaws as customary tenants under the Olu of Warri, with no claim to radical title.
– Adurumokumor v. Kponu (Suit W/20/46, 1946): Adurumokumor, representing the Bakokodie Ijaw community, claimed title to land in Nana Creek but failed to prove ownership. Ademola J. dismissed the action, noting that the Ijaws, migrants from Gbaran near Brass, were permitted to settle by Governor Chanomi Iye (1870–1879) on the authority of Omadino Itsekiris. When Ijaws persisted in demanding tributes, Omadino Itsekiris, led by Chief Edema Sillo and Edremoda Golly, won a declaration of title over Bakokodie and surrounding lands, with damages for trespass. The West African Court of Appeal upheld this in Volume 14 WACA Reports at page 123.
– Omadino v. Bakokodie (Suits W/29/51, WACA No. 3707, W/37/61, SC/393/64): After disregarding the 1946 judgment, Ijaws faced a forfeiture suit by Omadino Itsekiris. The Supreme Court delivered a compromise judgment in which Ijaws acknowledged Omadino’s ownership, cementing their tenant status.
These rulings, spanning colonial and post-independence eras, leave no doubt that Warri belongs to the Itsekiri, with Ijaws of Ogbe-Ijoh and Gbaramatu, and Urhobos of Agbassa, as customary tenants. The Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ persistent failure to sustain any legal challenge over decades exposes their claims as brainless delusions, rooted in a refusal to accept their documented tenant status. Their inability to read and research these court records, available in public archives, is a testament to their intellectual poverty and their pathetic refusal to accept truth.
THE OLU’S PALACE: A SYMBOL OF ITSEKIRI SOVEREIGNTY
The Ijaws’ brainless claim that the Olu of Warri resides on Okumagba land as a tenant is a laughable fabrication that only a delusional mind could concoct. The Olu’s palace stands proudly on Itsekiri ancestral lands in Ugbori and Okere. The case they’re even making references to is not even a case of Warri ownership nor is it even Okere ownership but a land dispute within okere community in the idimi-sobo quarter. The case Idudun v. Okumagba (SC/309/74). In this case, the Okumagba family secured possessory rights to 281.1 acres along Okumagba Avenue within Idimi Sobo in Okere, but the Supreme Court explicitly stated that the radical title remained with the Olu of Warri, as no counterclaim for title was made. The Itsekiri’s ownership of Ugbori, Okere, and 98% of Warri lands is undisputed, with the Okumagba exception being a limited possessory right, not ownership of okere or Warri. This fact obliterates the Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ delusional narrative, revealing their ignorance of basic legal principles and their pathetic attempt to rewrite a history they cannot comprehend.
DISMANTLING THE IJAW AND URHOBO’S BRAINLESS AND DELUSIONAL CLAIMS
The Ijaw and Urhobo claims, as articulated by Comr. Miebi Thomp, are a pathetic tapestry of lies, woven by minds so steeped in illiteracy that they believe their own hallucinatory fabrications. Their failure to read, research, or accept truth is evident in their inability to engage with primary historical documents, legal records, and scholarly works. Below, we dismantle their key assertions with surgical precision:
1. Misrepresentation of Chief Dore Numa: The Ijaws’ claim that Chief Dore Numa signed leases as a colonial agent, not a landowner, is a delusional distortion born of illiteracy. All land leases in Warri, including the 1906 lease of the Ogbe-Ijoh waterfront, were executed by Chief Dore Numa and Chief Ogbe, who was in charge of Warri city at the time, acting on behalf of the Itsekiri people and as representatives of the Olu of Warri. After Chief Dore’s death, Itsekiri chiefs Skinn, Omagbemi, and Gbenebitse were substituted in land cases, continuing to represent Itsekiri interests. If, as the Ijaws claim, Dore acted solely as a British agent, why were Itsekiri chiefs allowed to take over these cases? This undeniable fact exposes the Ijaws’ brainless ignorance and their pathetic attempt to distort a clear historical record. Their failure to research this basic fact, documented in colonial archives, is a testament to their inability to read and accept truth.
2. Ijaw and Urhobo Migration, Not Indigeneity: J. C. Anene situates the Ijaw homeland in the Niger Delta south of Abo, with Ogbe-Ijoh linked to the Operemor clan and Gbaramatu to the Gbaran clan of Bayelsa. Agbassa Urhobos are similarly migrants, with no pre-1480 presence in Warri, unlike the Yoruba groups (Ijebu, Mahin/Ilaje, Ugbos, Ife) who inhabited the area for over 1,000 years. Ijaw and Urhobo settlements, often fishing camps or trading outposts, emerged under Itsekiri permission, as tenants. The Ijaws’ own witnesses, like Dumokoromo and Omisikuta in 1934, admitted settling with the Olu’s consent, and the Bakokodie Ijaws acknowledged Omadino Itsekiri ownership in *Adurumokumor v. Kponu (1946)*. The Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ failure to research their own migratory history, documented by scholars like Anene, Ajayi, and Espie, reveals their brainless refusal to accept truth.
3. Colonial Court Mischaracterization: The Ijaws’ dismissal of colonial-era rulings as “rigged” is a brainless attempt to discredit legally binding judgments. These rulings were validated by post-independence Nigerian courts, including the Supreme Court in 1967 (SC/450/65) and 1964 (SC/393/64). Their claim that these judgments are “expired” betrays an ignorance so profound it borders on self-delusion. This isn’t new—both the Ibibio and Eket people in Akwa Ibom have similar rulings against the Ijaws as tenants. The Ijaws claim these judgments are “rigged” and “expired.” It’s quite the coincidence that every court decision against them is supposedly biased, isn’t it? It just highlights how their land-grabbing tactics flop in court. Their attempts to seize land aren’t limited to the Itsekiri; anywhere there’s oil, the Ijaws seem to target it. The Ijaws and Urhobos’ pathetic claims that colonial court rulings and Supreme Court decisions from 1924 to 1973—declaring them mere tenants of the Itsekiris—are “expired” or “rigged” expose their staggering ignorance. Illiteracy would be a compliment compared to their level of stupidity; if there’s anything worse than illiteracy, that’s exactly where these groups are wallowing, utterly clueless and delusional.
6. Ogbe-Ijoh Waterfront Misrepresentation: The Ijaws’ reference to the Ogbe-Ijoh waterfront as evidence of ownership is a delusional misstep. This market quarter was leased to the government by Itsekiri Chiefs Dore Numa and Ogbe in 1906, acting on behalf of the Itsekiri people, after evicting Ijaw fish-sellers who were served a quit notice in 1895. The Ijaws’ failure to contest this lease or join related cases in 1922 and 1926, including the Agbassa Urhobo’s failed claim against Chief Dore, confirms their lack of title. Their 1933 petition, decades after eviction, was ignored, as courts consistently recognized Itsekiri ownership. The Ijaws’ inability to research these documented events reveals their brainless refusal to accept truth.
7. Cultural and Linguistic Disconnect: The Ijaws and Urhobos share no cultural, linguistic, or ancestral ties with the Olu of Warri. The Itsekiri’s Yoruba and Edo influences, rooted in their 1,000-year presence, contrast sharply with Ijaw traditions centered in Bayelsa and Rivers State, and Urhobo traditions elsewhere. The Pere of Isaba’s acknowledgment of a maternal link through Emaye’s marriage to the Olu is a gesture of submission, not ownership, as confirmed in the 1934 Saba case. The Ijaws’ claim to Warri is a cultural absurdity, born of their brainless refusal to acknowledge their migratory history.
8. Historical Ignorance of Warri’s Terrain: The Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ claim that Warri was a “hinterland” compared to Ode-Itsekiri “swampy” reveals their profound ignorance of the land they claim to own. Warri’s terrain, as documented by Europeans explorers and colonial surveys, was a network of islands as noted by John Adam’s in 1780s it was swampy as most areas of the entire Warri today. But it was strategically developed by the Itsekiri as a coastal hub, with Ode-Itsekiri as the cultural heartland. The Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ failure to research this basic geography, available in historical records, further exposes their delusional narrative and level of ignorance.
9. Bakokodie Ijaws’ Failed Claims: The case of *Adurumokumor v. Kponu (Suit W/20/46, 1946)* further demolishes the Ijaws’ claims. Adurumokumor, representing the Bakokodie Ijaw community, claimed title to land in Nana Creek but failed to prove ownership. Ademola J. dismissed the action, noting that the Ijaws, migrants from Gbaran near Brass, were permitted to settle by Governor Chanomi Iye (1870–1879) on the authority of Omadino Itsekiris. When Ijaws persisted in demanding tributes, Omadino Itsekiris, led by Chief Edema Sillo and Edremoda Golly, won a declaration of title over Bakokodie and surrounding lands, with damages for trespass. The West African Court of Appeal upheld this in Volume 14 WACA Reports at page 123. Subsequent suits (*W/29/51, WACA No. 3707, W/37/61, SC/393/64*) culminated in a Supreme Court compromise judgment in which Ijaws acknowledged Omadino’s ownership, cementing their tenant status. The Ijaws’ failure to research these court records, available in public archives, is a testament to their brainless refusal to accept truth.
VIOLENCE AND FRAUD: THE IJAW AND URHOBO’S DESPERATE TACTICS
The Ijaws’ reference to surviving “coordinated attacks” during the Warri Crisis (1997–2003) is a shameless attempt to paint themselves as victims while ignoring their role in starting the war against itsekiri’s over oil wealth and political control. The 1996 conflict over the Ogidigben Local Government Area, where the military governor favored Ogbe-Ijoh, sparked the first Warri war, highlighting Ijaw aggression. Their recent encroachments, as noted in a June 2025, appeal by the Itsekiri for federal protection, underscore their reliance on illegal occupation and violence. The Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ secret challenges to INEC in 2022, resulting in fraudulent ward delineations, prompted the Itsekiri’s peaceful march through Warri, supported by irrefutable evidence of their ownership. These acts of fraud and violence, including the Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ attempts to manipulate political boundaries, are the desperate tactics of brainless tenants who believe they can use that to undo the court decisions which declared them tenants further exposes their inability to accept truth.
THE ITSEKIRI’S MORAL AND HISTORICAL STRENGTH
The Itsekiri, known as Itsekiri-Ene (“blessings surround us”), have maintained their cultural integrity and moral strength for over 1,000 years, united under one king, one language, and one kingdom. Their cultural connections to Yoruba, Igala, and Benin, and their adoption of European influences through trade, underscore their historical depth and adaptability, in stark contrast to the Ijaws’ and Urhobos’ shallow, delusional claims. The Itsekiri’s commitment to peace, despite provocations, is a testament to their moral fortitude, as seen in their peaceful marches against INEC’s fraudulent delineations and their appeals for federal protection.
A CALL FOR EDUCATION, PEACE, AND JUSTICE
The Concerned Indigenous Stakeholders’ statement is a monument to brainless delusion, a product of abject illiteracy so profound that its authors believe their own fabricated history. Comr. Miebi Thomp and his group must abandon their hallucinatory propaganda and enroll in basic education to learn how to read, research, and accept truth. Their failure to engage with primary historical documents, legal records, and scholarly works, all readily available in public archives, is a testament to their intellectual poverty and their pathetic refusal to confront reality. The truth of Itsekiri ownership, rooted in over 1,000 years of history and formalized by the 548-year-old Kingdom of Warri, cannot be buried by the rantings of the uneducated.
We call on the Federal Government, INEC, and all stakeholders to:
– Uphold the legal precedents from 1925 to 1973, documented in over 40 court cases, including *Adurumokumor v. Kponu (1946)* and *Ometan v. Chief Dore Numa (1926)*, affirming Itsekiri ownership of Warri under the Olu’s overlordship.
– Investigate INEC’s fraudulent ward delineations, manipulated by Ijaw and Urhobo elements, and redo the process with a neutral party from Abuja, excluding partisan tribes, to ensure justice.
– Protect Itsekiri lands from further encroachments, as highlighted in the June 25, 2025, appeal for federal intervention.
– Promote peaceful dialogue, respecting the historical and legal reality of Itsekiri ownership and the tenant status of Ogbe-Ijoh, Gbaramatu, and Agbassa.
Warri, rooted in over 1,000 years of Itsekiri presence and formalized by the 548-year-old Kingdom of Warri, remains the ancestral domain of the Itsekiri. The Olu’s palace stands proudly on Itsekiri lands in Ugbori and Okere, and the Ijaws and Urhobos, as customary tenants, must cease their brainless, delusional claims and embrace peaceful coexistence. No amount of illiterate rhetoric, fabricated history, or illegal occupation will ever change this unassailable truth.
Signed:
Comr. Lily-white O. Esigbone
Chairman
Itsekiri Historical Front
Mr. Oritsegbubemi Adrian Edema
President Itsekiri Historical Front
United kingdom (UK)
Silva Samuel Maku
Secretary
Itsekiri Historical Front
Kwame Wood
P.R.O
Itsekiri Historical Front
(IHF)
Warri, Delta State
Leave a Reply