ITSEKIRI YOUTH ELITES (IYE) DISMISS CLAIMS OF FRAUDULENT 1884 TREATY, ACCUSE IJAW COMMENTATOR OF DISTORTING HISTORY FOR TERRITORIAL GAIN

Warri, Delta State – August 6, 2025

The Itsekiri Youth Elites, under the leadership of Lily-white O. Esigbone, have issued a powerful and comprehensive rebuttal to recent claims made by an Ijaw commentator, Freeborn Abraye, who labeled the historic 1884 Treaty of Protection between Chief Nana Olomu of Itsekiri and the British as “fraudulent” and accused the Itsekiri leader of unlawfully including Ijaw territories in the agreement.

In a detailed statement made available to the media, Comr. Lily-white described Abraye’s publication as “an act of historical vandalism rooted in ignorance, desperation, and ethnic provocation.” The youth group emphasized that the claims were not only false but dangerous, with the potential to undermine peaceful coexistence among the ethnic groups of the Niger Delta if left unchecked.

THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT: WHO SIGNED WHAT, AND WHY?

The 1884 Treaty of Protection was part of a series of diplomatic instruments signed by the British Crown with coastal African polities as the empire expanded its commercial and colonial reach. Chief Nana Olomu, an influential Itsekiri merchant prince and political leader, who was the governor of the benin river, signed the treaty on behalf of the Itsekiri Nation, representing the Benin River district, an area that encompassed Forcados, Escravos, and Ramos Rivers.

> “At the time of the treaty,” Lily-white stated, “the Ijaw people had no presence, political, residential, or territorial, in these areas. The only documented Ijaw settlements were in the far eastern delta: Bonny, Brass, and Kalabari. The western delta rivers were under the undisputed control of the Itsekiri, who had established trade posts, communities, and diplomatic relationships there for centuries.”

Comr. Lily-white accused Freeborn Abraye and others of trying to retroactively implant Ijaw claims into regions that were never historically theirs. he said this campaign of revisionism was being fueled by a long-standing desire to appropriate land and resources that are rightfully Itsekiri.

ITSEKIRI CONTROL OF RIVERS AND TRADE ROUTES

The statement further showed the fact that the rivers in question were not “open territories” but historical and politically administered Itsekiri trade routes, operated through a network of royal emissaries and merchant-princes like Chief Nana. Colonial records from the period describe the Itsekiri as the gatekeepers of trade in the western Niger Delta, managing the passage of goods and people from inland communities to European firms along the coast.

> “Let the truth be told,” Lily-white said. “Chief Nana was appointed Governor of the Benin River by British authorities because of his influence and control over the area, not because the Ijaws invited him to sign anything on their behalf, we should also note that the ijaws where never in warri then.”

He added that Ijaw groups were denied unrestricted access to these rivers by both the Itsekiri authorities and later the colonial administration. Ijaws were regarded as strangers or fishing tenants, not native titleholders.

THE WESTWARD MIGRATION OF THE IJAW: A 20TH CENTURY PHENOMENON

The President of Itsekiri Youth Elites also highlighted that Ijaw settlements in the Warri axis are a relatively recent occurrence, dating from the early 20th century, long after the signing of the 1884 treaty. These migrations were largely triggered by:

The collapse of Ijaw trade centers in Bonny and Nembe after confrontations with British forces;

The loss of political autonomy in their core areas due to British imperial dominance;

Economic displacement, prompting movement toward more stable trade routes in Warri territory.

> “Gbaramatu, Ogbe-Ijoh, Egbeoma and isaba were not ancient riverine kingdoms in the Warri region,” Lily-white noted. “They are communities that sprang up in Itsekiri lands after colonial boundaries were drawn, and in many cases, through temporary fishing camps that became semi-permanent with time.”

COLONIAL RECORDS AND LEGAL PRECEDENTS BACK ITSEKIRI CLAIMS

The Itsekiri Youth Elites further cited colonial intelligence reports, Native Authority land records, court judgments, and the Willink Commission of 1958, all of which repeatedly recognized the Itsekiri as the original inhabitants and landowners of the territories now being claimed by Ijaw groups.

During the colonial period, the Olu of Warri was granted Native Authority over Warri Province, and Ijaw delegations on multiple occasions petitioned for separate recognition, acknowledging that they were under Itsekiri jurisdiction. These facts, the group argued, discredit any suggestion that the Ijaws were indigenous to Forcados, Escravos, or Ramos Rivers.

WARNING AGAINST ETHNIC TENSION AND FALSE HISTORY

Issuing a stern warning, the statement emphasized the dangers of falsifying history to serve present-day political agendas. It said that territorial blackmail by invoking “inclusion” in treaties they were never party to, will not erase the historical truth of Itsekiri ownership.

> “We have tolerated these false narratives for too long,” Lily-white declared. “But the line must be drawn. We will not allow our ancestral identity to be rewritten for electoral advantage or land-grabbing schemes.”

DEFENDING A LEGITIMATE TREATY

The Itsekiri Youth Elites President insist that the 1884 Treaty of Protection was a valid diplomatic agreement that reflected the sovereignty of the Itsekiri people at the time. Describing it as fraudulent, according to them, is not just an insult to Chief Nana, but to the entire precolonial and colonial legacy of Warri Kingdom and Nigeria in General.

> “You cannot erase history with propaganda,” the statement concluded. “The 1884 treaty stands as a legitimate expression of Itsekiri sovereignty—recognized by the British, acknowledged by the courts, and validated by time.”