Opinion

Amaechi: Save Borikiri Residents

Published

16 years ago

January 16, 2010

I use this singular privilege to congratulate you on your meritorious service to the people of Rivers State. It is evident since your inception into office as governor of the State, the laudable developmental projects embarked upon by your administration. The security of lives and property in the state is commendable.

Your Excellency, it is a notorious fact that for over two years, the Harold Wilson – Police Road is blocked against road users between the hours of 6 pm to 6 am. Worse still, even pedestrians are stopped from using the road at some point of the night. I also share the experience at about 10. pm on a fateful day. It will be re-called that few years ago, specifically on the eve of the Christmas/New Year festivities; there was a shoot-out in the area which led to the death of some innocent citizens of the country. This ugly incident led to the building of walls at night by the Nigeria Police Force, Borikiri Division till date. Your Excellency, it is only on this basis that the fundamental rights of the residents of Borikiri was perpetually violated by the Nigeria Police Force. The conduct is condemnable.

Rt. Hon, the right of freedom of movement is an inalienable right of every citizen of the State safeguarded by the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This right is not merely declaratory but mandatorily protected by the ground-num of the land. The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, the sixth edition defines movement as “an act of moving from one place to another or of moving something from one place to another” Accordingly, Section 41 (1) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 graciously couched that “every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria and reside in any part thereof …” Nevertheless subsection (2) of the said constitution qualified the right guaranteed and state as follows “Nothing in subsection (1) of this section shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society…” Sir, the reasonable justifiability of any law or conduct violating the right of movement of any citizen is based on two facts – when a citizen has committed or reasonably suspected to have committed a criminal office and for public interest.

Our governor, the fundamental right enshrined in our constitution is individualistic; hence the residents of Borikiri cannot suffer from an offence committed by one or group of persons assuming a crime is being committed. I humbly refer you to the case of Amachree v Newington (1952) 14 WACA 97 and advocate that subsection (2) does not apply to the residents of Borikiri as no criminal offence whatsoever is pronounced committed by a competent court of Justice. It is trite that the fundamental right of movement can not even be invaded by the legislature except for the sake of recognised public interest. Assuming but not acceding that there is a public interest, then, a public emergency shall be declared before any right is curtailed. In the instant violation and deprivation there is no recognised public interest, no public emergency, but a willful denial of our rights they ought to protect. The Western Nigeria crisis of 1962 adumbrates this fact. Movement of certain individuals were curtailed by the government as public emergency was declared under S. 70 (3) (b) of the then Federal Constitution and a set of 13 Regulations made under the Emergency Power Act 1961 and were approved by the Federal Parliament. The 1999 Constitution does not appear to have effected any change in this matter, thus, the procedure must be strictly adhered to. Consequently, in Alhaji O. S. Adegbenro V. A. G Federation and Ors (1962) WNLR 169, Taylor F. J. said, “in my judgment, the step which have been taken are reasonably justifiable as a preventive measure to attain peace and order …. “. The question is, is the end point of the barricade to attain peace and order or just a cowardice of the Police Force in discharging her duties? In Chief F. R. A Williams V. Majekodonmi (1962) All NLR 413 the Federal Supreme Court had no hesitation in declaring the restriction order violating the fundamental right of movement as ultra vires and therefore set aside.

Sir, for public emergency to be declared, it must be supported by not less than two-third majority of the House of Assembly. Can one abdicate the legislative powers of the legislature (House of Assembly) to Nigeria Police Force? Of curse, there is no such abdication, for the House of Assembly still takes charge as provided under Section 4 of the Constitution. It is my opinion, that, the violation is subversive of the right parliament enjoy notwithstanding the fact that the Government in council shall take decision necessary and expedient in the interest of the State. It is my argument that wherever anything is forbidden it is forbidden to do it directly or indirectly.

Your Excellency, it is burdensome, when persons or institutions established to protect and enforce the law willfully violate it. By the provision of Section 4 of the Police Act Cap P. 19 LFN, the law states categorically that, “ the Police shall be employed for the prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of offenders, the preservation of law and order, the protection of life and property and the due enforcement of all laws and regulations … “ Can one run to the Borikiri Police in times of emergency when its doors are closed? Or could it be right that Section 4 of the said Act, exclusively protects the Nigeria Police Force nay Borikiri Police station? Obviously, the answer is in the negative for it is not permitted to be wiser than the law, not even the Nigeria Police Force. The barricade is an insignia of depression, as depression is a state of mind, a loss of faith instability and security of Rivers State. The people of Rivers State have worked pass such era, presumably if it ever existed.

The conduct of the Police intended to help, but could not redress the constitutional issue raised rather it subjects the inhabitants of Borikiri into slavery and long suffering.

My position therefore, is that the barricade is not only ultra vires, it is indeed unconstitutional; an infringement of the most solemn constitutionally guaranteed right.

Asemebo is a Port Harcourt based legal practitioner.

Fortune Asemebo

Opinion

Trans-Kalabari Road: Work In Progress

Published

6 hours ago

January 12, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”This Dream project is one of the best things that have happened to the people and residents of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas in recent times.”

This is the concluding part of this story featured in our last edition.

Good road network helps farmers to convey their agro-allied products to commercial hubs where buyers and sellers meet periodically to transact business. Road network engineers and motivates people resident in unfriendly geographical terrains, like riverine areas, to own property and shuttle home with ease. Some people will prefer living in their own houses in a more serene and nature-blessed communities to living in the city that is fraught with pollution, and other environmental, social and economic hazards. Prior to the cult epidemic that ravaged parts of Rivers State, the Emohuas, Elemes, Ogonis, and Etches were known for rural dwelling. Most public servants from these areas do their official and private transactions from their villages. For them it was comparatively easier to live in the village and engage in a diversified economic endeavours through farming, fishing or other lucrative business without outrageous charges and embarrassment associated with doing business in Port Harcourt, where land is as scarce as the traditional needle.

That is why the decision to construct the Trans-Kalabari Road by the administration of Dr. Peter Odili was one of the best decisions that administration took. When Dr. Odili vacated office as the Rivers State Governor, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi took over and awarded contracts for continuation of the road project which in my considered view is the felt need of the people of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas. Unfortunately, Rt. Hon. Amaechi’s efforts to drive the project was sabotaged by some contractors some of whom are Kalabari people. The main Trans-Kalabari Road is one project that is dear to the people and residents of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas of Rivers State. This is because through the road commuters can easily access several communities in the three local government areas. For instance, the road when completed will enable access to eight of the ten communities in Degema Local Government Area, namely: Bukuma, Tombia, Bakana, Oguruama, Obuama, Usokun, Degema town and the Degema Consulate. It will also link 15 of the 16 communities in Asari Toru Local Government Area. The communities are: Buguma, the local government headquarters, Ido, Abalama, Tema, Sama, Okpo, Ilelema, Ifoko, Tema, Sangama, Krakrama, Omekwe-Ama, Angulama. The road will also connect 14 of 17 wards in Akuku Toru Local Government Area, and other settlements. It is interesting to note that It is faster, and far more convenient and economical for the catchment Communities on the Trans-Kalabari Road network to go to the State Capital than the East West Road. The people of the three local government areas will prefer to work or do their transactions in Port Harcourt from their respective communities to staying in Port Harcourt where the house rent and the general cost of living is astronomically high.

Consequently, development will seamlessly spread to the 28 out of 34 communities of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas. The only Communities that are not linked by the road project are Oporoama in Asari Toru, the Ke and Bille Communities in Degema Local Government Area and the “Oceania” communities of Abissa, Kula, Soku, Idama, Elem Sangama of Akuku Toru Local Government Area. But because of the economic value of the unlinked Communities to Nigeria, (they produce substantial oil and gas in the area), the Federal, State Governments and the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), can extend the road network to those areas just as Bonny is linked to Port Harcourt and the Lagos Mainland Bridge is connecting several towns in Lagos and neighbouring States.Kudos to previous administrations who had constructed the Central Group axis.

However, what is said to be the First Phase of the Trans-Kalabari Road project is actually a linkage of the “Central Group” Communities which consists of Krakrama, Angulama, Omekwe. Ama, Omekwe Tari Ama, Ifoko, Tema, Sangama. It is the peripheral of the Trans-Kalabari Road. The completion of the Main Trans Kalabari project will free Port Harcourt and Obio/Akpor areas from congestion. It will motivate residents and people of the three local areas to contribute to the development of their Communities. If the Ogonis, Etches, Emohuas, Oyigbos, Okrikas, Elemes can feel comfortable doing business in Port Harcourt from home, residents and people whose communities are linked to Port Harcourt through the Trans-Kalabari Road will no doubt, do likewise. The vast arable virgin land of the Bukuma people can be open for development and sustainable agricultural ventures by Local, State and Federal Government.

It is necessary to recall that the Bukuma community was host to the Federal Government’s Graduate Farmers’ Scheme and the Rivers State Government moribund School-to-Land Scheme under Governor Fidelis Oyakhilome. Bukuma was the only community in Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas that has the capacity to carry those agricultural programmes. However the lack of road to transport farm produce to Port Harcourt and facilitate the movement of the beneficiaries of the scheme who lived in the community which is several miles away from the farms, hampered the sustainability of the programme. The main Trans-Kalabari Road remains the best gift to the people of Degema, Asari Toru, and Akuku-Toru Local Government Areas. Kudos to Sir Siminilayi Fubara.

By: Igbiki Benibo

Opinion

That U.S. Capture of Maduro

Published

6 hours ago

January 12, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Strategic convenience does not nullify sovereignty. Political frustration does not authorise military abduction.”

The first part of this story was published in our last edition.

In Africa and the Middle East, regime change—whether by invasion, proxy warfare, or sanctions—has often left behind fractured states, weakened institutions, and prolonged instability. Washington’s motivations in Venezuela are widely understood: vast oil reserves, alliances with U.S. rivals, and symbolic defiance of American influence in the Western Hemisphere. But none of these reasons confer legal or moral legitimacy. Strategic convenience does not nullify sovereignty. Political frustration does not authorise military abduction. If every powerful nation acted on its grievances in this manner, global chaos would inevitably follow. International law provides mechanisms for accountability. Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), individuals accused of crimes against humanity or other grave offences are subject to investigation and prosecution through judicial processes.

Likewise, extradition treaties, mutual legal assistance agreements, and Interpol mechanisms exist to ensure accountability while respecting due process. These frameworks were designed precisely to prevent unilateral enforcement of “justice” by military force. The most profound consequence of America’s action may not be in Caracas, but in the precedent it sets. If the world accepts that a superpower can unilaterally depose another country’s president, then the foundation of the international system is weakened. Sovereignty becomes conditional—no longer a right, but a privilege tolerated at the discretion of the powerful. Going forward, if another country invades its neighbour, will the United States retain the moral authority to impose sanctions or demand restraint? Some analysts already warn that parallels between Russia’s actions in Ukraine and America’s conduct in Venezuela risk further eroding global norms. Selective adherence to international law breeds cynicism and accelerates the drift toward a world governed by force rather than rules.

Power—military, economic, or political—should serve human progress and collective well-being, not domination and destruction. For African nations, many of which emerged from colonial rule through bitter struggle, this precedent is especially alarming. Sovereignty is not an abstract legal concept; it is a hard-won shield against external domination. Any erosion of that principle anywhere weakens it everywhere. Africa’s painful history of foreign interference makes this lesson especially urgent. For me, the real issue is not whether Nicolás Maduro is a good or bad leader. That judgment belongs, first and foremost, to the Venezuelan people. The larger issue is whether the international system still operates on law—or has quietly reverted to hierarchy. If America insists it is defending global order, it must ask itself a difficult question: can an order survive when its most powerful guardian feels entitled to violate it? Until that question is answered honestly, the capture of a foreign president will remain not a triumph of justice, but a troubling symbol of a world drifting from law toward force.

If the United States felt so strongly about the allegations of terrorism, drug trafficking against Maduro, were there no other lawful options? Judicial accountability, diplomacy, regional mediation, and multilateral pressure may be slow and imperfect, but they reflect respect for international law and sovereign equality. Military seizure is a blunt instrument. It humiliates institutions, radicalizes populations, and hardens resistance. It may remove a leader, but it rarely resolves the underlying crisis. History teaches that military interventions seldom result in stable democratic outcomes. More often, they breed resentment, resistance, and long-term instability. For the sake of global order and the rule of law, the United States should reconsider this path and recommit to diplomacy, legal cooperation, and respect for the sovereign equality of states. Former U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly described the invasion of Venezuela as “unlawful and unwise,” warning that such actions “do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable.” Her words reflect a growing recognition, even within the United States, that force without legitimacy undermines both moral authority and global stability.

Should what happened in Venezuela serve as a wake-up call for corrupt African leaders who undermine the people’s right to choose their leaders? The answer is yes. The capture of Maduro should alarm African leaders who manipulate elections, weaken institutions, suppress opposition, undermine citizens’ rights, or cling to power at all costs. Venezuela faced widespread criticism over disputed elections and repression long before this episode, and that context shaped how the world reacted. This does not justify foreign military intervention, but it highlights an uncomfortable truth: prolonged democratic decay isolates nations and invites external pressure—from sanctions to diplomatic censure. Global opinion matters, and legitimacy at home strengthens sovereignty abroad. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and several African leaders have rightly condemned the events in Venezuela, invoking the principles of sovereignty and non-interference enshrined in international and regional law.

Beyond condemnation, however, African leaders must look inward. The continent’s future cannot be built on repression, constitutional manipulation, and personal greed. Leadership must reflect the will of the people, not desperation for power. Two days ago, a social commentator on a radio station argued that Trump’s action—though condemnable—demonstrates how far a leader can go for his country’s interest. According to this view, he did not intervene in Venezuela for personal enrichment, but to strengthen his nation. In stark contrast, many African leaders plunder their own countries. They siphon public resources, impose crushing taxes and harmful policies, and leave their citizens poorer—all for selfish gain. That contradiction is the deeper lesson Africa must confront.True sovereignty is protected not only by international law, but by accountable leadership at home.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Kudos Gov Fubara

Published

1 week ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Please permit me to use this medium to appreciate our able governor, Siminalayi Fubara for the inauguration of the 14.2-kilometre Obodhi–Ozochi Road in Ahoada-East Local Government Area. This inauguration marks a significant milestone in the history of our communities and deserves commendation. We, the people of Ozochi, are particularly happy because this project has brought long-awaited relief after years of isolation and hardship.

The expression of our traditional ruler, His Royal Highness, Eze Prince Ike Ehie, JP, during the inauguration captured the joy of our people. He said, “our isolation is over.” That reflects the profound impact of this road on daily life, economic activities, and social integration of the people of Ozochi and other neighbouring communities. The road will no doubt ease transportation, improve access to markets and healthcare, and strengthen links between Ahoada, Omoku, and other parts of Rivers State.

The people of Ahoada, Omoku, and indeed Rivers State as a whole are grateful to our dear governor for this laudable achievement and wish him many more successful years in office. We pray that God endows him with more wisdom and strength to continue to pilot the affairs of the state for the benefit of all. As citizens, we should rally behind the governor and support his development agenda. Our politicians and stakeholders should embrace peace and cooperation, as no meaningful progress can be achieved in an atmosphere of conflict. Sustainable development in the state can only thrive where peace prevails.

Samuel Ebiye