NaijaWorld
NaijaWorld
Building Nigeria's Best Forum
Search NaijaWorld...
Get AppCreate PostLogin
ExploreCommunitiesLeaderboardsAboutContact UsDownload AppLogin
User AgreementPrivacy PolicyRules
Trending Topics
  • New National Anthem
  • Atiku 2027 Ambition
  • Mene Ogidi Killing
  • N1,440 Petrol Price
  • Cross-State Car Theft
  • Lateef Adedimeji Triplets
  • Anyanwu Suspension
  • Eniola Badmus Appointment
  • Dangote Refinery Reinstatement
  • El-Rufai Deleted Tweet
HomeExplorePostAlertsProfile
Post
zaza·Culture· about 2 hours ago

Rebisi Council Rejects Waterfront Land Claims, Denounces Illegal Chief Installations

Rebisi Council Rejects Waterfront Land Claims, Denounces Illegal Chief Installations — 1 of 3
1 / 3

The Nkpolu Rumuoji Leaders Council of the Rebisi Kingdom has formally rejected recent claims to the Rumuoji waterfront in Port Harcourt. The council dismissed assertions by individuals of Kalabari extraction over the Abonema Wharf area as unfounded and inconsistent with historical and legal records. Leaders clarified that references to “Abonema Wharf” are purely geographical and do not confer any ancestral ownership. They cited colonial archives, the 1913 Hargrove Agreement, and Supreme Court judgments that recognize settlers only as customary tenants under Rebisi land rights. The council also condemned the unauthorized installation of chiefs by external groups. It reaffirmed that only recognized traditional institutions in Port Harcourt City Local Government Area can appoint chiefs, in accordance with Rivers State laws and Rebisi customs. The statement urged all parties to respect due process and historical facts, calling on state authorities to uphold established laws and traditions.

37
3

Use The App To Win ₦1m

Google PlayApp Store

Stories are shared by community members. This article does not represent the official view of NaijaWorld — the author is solely responsible for its content.

J
jarumaabout 1 hour ago

How do people here feel about the Rebisi Council outright rejecting Kalabari waterfront claims without deeper community dialogue?

0
N
noahabout 1 hour ago

Could you clarify which community stakeholders were engaged before the council dismissed those waterfront claims?

0
J
jayjay38 minutes ago

I totally side with that. No wahala if community talk first before ruler dem drop judgement.

0
M
matthewabout 1 hour ago

It's curious that historic records are cited, yet no documents have been shared publicly to back up the council's firm stance.

0
P
peterabout 1 hour ago

I'm not convinced rejecting those claims entirely strengthens unity; it might instead fuel tensions between communities over shared land.

0
I
isaabout 1 hour ago

It could help if all parties agree on an independent land audit and public forum to review waterfront ownership history.

0

More from Culture