Why Itsekiri Reject INEC’s Proposed Wards and Polling Units Delineation in Warri Federal Constituency

The Itsekiri ethnic nationality has formally rejected INEC’s proposed delineation of wards and polling units in Warri Federal Constituency, citing constitutional breaches, electoral injustice, and political imbalance. This analysis explores the legal, political, and historical implications of the controversy.

Warri is not just another city in Nigeria; it is a microcosm of the nation’s most delicate questions—ethnicity, oil politics, and electoral justice. At the heart of the Niger Delta, Warri Federal Constituency carries significant weight in national politics and the Nigerian economy. It is home to the Itsekiri, Ijaw, and Urhobo ethnic groups, all of whom have long contested for political representation, access to resources, and recognition of their place within Nigeria’s federation.

Against this backdrop, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) conducted a field exercise to review and propose fresh delineations of wards and polling units in Warri South, Warri South-West, and Warri North Local Government Areas. Instead of resolving existing grievances, the exercise sparked a new round of controversy.

The Itsekiri ethnic nationality has rejected the outcome of INEC’s field work, citing violations of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the Electoral Act 2022, and INEC’s own guidelines. They argue that the process overreached INEC’s constitutional mandate, created fictitious communities, misplaced polling units across state boundaries, and ultimately undermined the integrity of Nigeria’s electoral system.

This blogpost provides an authoritative analysis of the issue. It situates the Itsekiri rejection within Nigeria’s constitutional framework, examines historical precedents, and highlights the broader implications for electoral justice, democratic stability, and peace in Warri and beyond.

Section 1: INEC’s Constitutional Mandate

The starting point of any conversation on delineation is the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, particularly Section 114(1), which provides:

“The Independent National Electoral Commission shall review the division of every state into constituencies at intervals of not less than ten years, and may alter such constituencies in accordance with the provisions of this section to such extent as it may consider desirable in the light of the review.”

This provision empowers INEC to periodically review constituencies, wards, and polling units, primarily to ensure fair representation as population figures and settlements evolve.

The Constitution also provides in Section 114(2) that INEC may review constituencies in consequence of:

Alteration of state boundaries, or

The holding of a national census.

Neither of these conditions has occurred in Delta State in recent years. Thus, the only live issue was the periodic review required by Section 114(1).

The Supreme Court judgment in Hon. George Timinimi & Ors v. INEC (SC/143/2016) directed INEC to conduct a fresh delineation of wards and polling units in Warri Federal Constituency. Importantly, the court did not declare existing wards or polling units fictitious, nor did it impugn INEC’s voter register. The judgment merely reinforced the constitutional duty of periodic review.

Therefore, while INEC had the authority to conduct the exercise, the Itsekiri argue that the Commission exceeded its constitutional powers in the manner it carried out the field work.

Section 2: Why the Itsekiri Rejected INEC’s Field Report

According to the Itsekiri leadership, INEC’s field report on Warri’s wards and polling units is fatally flawed. Their objections can be grouped into four main categories:

1. Ultra Vires Acts by INEC

INEC allegedly went beyond its administrative mandate by:

Creating or recognizing communities not officially gazetted.

Attempting to determine ethnic ownership of territories.

Using unofficial population estimates from aerial surveys and Google maps.

Such actions, the Itsekiri argue, amount to administrative overreach. The Constitution does not empower INEC to decide community ownership, redraw ethnic boundaries, or invent new settlements.

2. Misplacement of Polling Units

Survey findings show several polling units placed in impossible or wrong locations:

Warri South-West LGA: 510 polling units listed outside the LGA; one polling unit (TURUFAGBENE PU 289) falls inside Edo State.

Warri North LGA: 99 polling units fall in Ondo and Edo States; some placed in rivers and swamps.

Warri South LGA: PU 16 “Merogun” listed at Deco Road, far from the actual Merogun community.

These errors undermine the credibility of the exercise and raise logistical questions about election-day voting.

3. Violation of Electoral Act 2022

Section 40(2) of the Electoral Act provides:

“The Commission shall establish adequate number of polling units in each registration area or electoral ward and shall allot voters to such polling units.”

The law requires INEC to rely on its voter register—an empirically valid database with biometric data—to determine where polling units should be located. By instead relying on contested maps and unofficial data, INEC violated both the spirit and letter of the Act.

4. Undermining Electoral Integrity

By creating fictitious or misplaced polling units, INEC risks inflating voter access in some areas while disenfranchising others. For the Itsekiri, this is not a neutral mistake but one that skews representation in favor of Ijaw and Urhobo communities, thereby entrenching political injustice.

Section 3: False Claims and Counter-Narratives

At a world press conference, Ijaw and Urhobo groups claimed they were denied electoral representation in Warri Federal Constituency. They described existing delineations as “gerrymandered” against them.

The Itsekiri counter that this narrative is misleading.

Ijaw and Urhobo Political Representation

Warri South-West LGA: Produced the Deputy Governor under Okowa, the current Speaker of the Delta State House of Assembly, and the LGA Chairman—all from Ijaw communities.

Warri North LGA: Former Chairman Hon. Smart Asukutu hailed from Egbema Ijaw.

Warri South LGA: Urhobo politicians have repeatedly occupied one of the two Assembly seats.

By contrast, the Itsekiri point out they have little to no political representation in Urhobo-dominated LGAs such as Sapele and Ethiope-West, or Ijaw strongholds like Burutu.

The Gerrymandering Argument

The claim that Warri’s delineation has historically disadvantaged Ijaw and Urhobo does not align with past records. In fact, the 1999 adjustment reduced Itsekiri Federal Constituencies from two to one, transferring a seat to the less-populated Burutu Ijaw. This remains a source of grievance for the Itsekiri, not their neighbors.

Section 4: Historical Context of Warri’s Delineation

To understand the controversy, one must revisit the evolution of Warri’s electoral map:

1992 Delineation: Warri had two Federal Constituencies (both occupied by Itsekiri) and four State Assembly Constituencies. Warri South had 10 wards (7 Itsekiri, 3 Urhobo), Warri North 10 wards (6 Itsekiri, 4 Ijaw).

1996 LGA Creation: Warri South-West was carved out of Warri North, producing 6 wards for Itsekiri and 4 for Ijaw.

1999 Review: INEC reduced Federal Constituencies from two to one, removing one from Itsekiri and awarding it to Ijaw of Burutu.

Each adjustment chipped away at Itsekiri representation, leaving them with fewer voices in Abuja despite being the demographic majority in the three Warri LGAs.

Section 5: The Warri Crisis and Misrepresentation

Ijaw and Urhobo spokesmen often claim the 1997–2003 Warri crises were caused by electoral imbalance. The Itsekiri reject this narrative.

The real flashpoint, they argue, was the relocation of Warri South-West LGA headquarters. Officially gazetted at Ogidigben (an Itsekiri area), it was illegally moved to Ogbe-Ijaw by state authorities. This unilateral move sparked violent conflicts, which escalated into what the Itsekiri describe as an attempted genocide against their people.

Linking the crisis to INEC delineation, therefore, is historically inaccurate and politically manipulative.

Section 6: Technical Review of INEC’s 2025 Field Report

Independent surveyors commissioned by the Itsekiri conducted a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis of INEC’s coordinates. Their findings:

Warri South-West: Out of 1,287 polling units, 510 lie outside the LGA. One even falls inside Edo State.

Warri North: 99 polling units mapped into Ondo and Edo States. Some polling units located in uninhabitable swamps or rivers.

Warri South: Several polling units misplaced, with names not matching their actual locations.

These findings highlight gross technical errors and suggest INEC’s data collection was neither rigorous nor lawful.

Section 7: Broader Implications for Nigerian Democracy

The Itsekiri rejection is not merely ethnic grievance. It raises deeper issues for Nigeria’s democracy:

Electoral Justice: Delineation errors can disenfranchise entire communities or unfairly inflate others.

INEC’s Integrity: A compromised delineation exercise undermines public trust in elections nationwide.

National Security: Threats by Ijaw and Urhobo groups to shut down oil installations in protest risk destabilizing Nigeria’s oil-dependent economy.

Rule of Law: If INEC strays beyond its constitutional limits, it sets a dangerous precedent of institutional overreach.

Section 8: The Way Forward

To restore confidence, several steps are necessary:

For INEC

Rely strictly on the voter register and census data, not speculative maps.

Conduct transparent consultations with all ethnic groups in Warri.

Correct technical errors in polling unit coordinates.

For the Federal Government

Investigate allegations of INEC misconduct.

Prosecute officials found to have acted unlawfully.

Protect oil and gas infrastructure from ethnic sabotage.

For Warri Stakeholders

Commit to dialogue, not threats.

Reject ethnic brinkmanship that undermines coexistence.

Advocate for peaceful resolution through constitutional means.

In Conclusion

The Itsekiri ethnic nationality’s rejection of INEC’s proposed wards and polling units in Warri Federal Constituency is more than a local dispute. It is a defense of constitutionalism, electoral fairness, and the rule of law in Nigeria.

By exceeding its mandate and producing flawed field reports, INEC has risked inflaming ethnic tensions and compromising democratic credibility. The Supreme Court judgment in Timinimi v. INEC required a lawful, data-driven review—not the creation of phantom communities or misplaced polling units.

For Nigeria to safeguard the integrity of its electoral system, the Warri controversy must be carefully resolved. INEC must return to constitutional boundaries, the Federal Government must enforce accountability, and stakeholders in Warri must prioritize peace over brinkmanship.

In the words of the Itsekiri leadership: any attempt to impose unconstitutional delineation is rejected. For Nigeria’s democracy, this moment is a test—not only of law but of justice.