22/07/2025
*“When the Land No Longer Trusts Its Children: Obolo State Creation, Anger, Hegemony, Bitterness”*
_By Mkpisong Dr. Joseph Rankin_
*Introduction: A Cry from the Deep*
I have watched the agitation for Obolo State creation not with fanfare, but with a heart heavy with sorrow. It is a sorrow that comes from observing the slow decay of once-shared kinship, the erosion of ancestral trust, and the weaponization of identity for political expediency.
A land where the people trust each other does not fracture like this. If the Ibibio, Obolo, Oron, and Ibeno had walked together in unity, if truth had been preserved, and justice allowed to flow like a river, no one would object to state creation, because it would be based on shared progress, not suspicion.
_Yet, here we are: divided, wounded, and repeating history’s mistakes._
And let it be boldly said: Obolo State will not bring the freedom its proponents hope for. It will not cure injustice. It will not redistribute power. It will not grant ownership of the oil that flows under the ground we fight over.
*1. Obolo State Will Not Set Us Free*
Freedom does not come by drawing new lines on old maps. Freedom is ownership—ownership of land, of dignity, of narrative, and of resources.
So far, no Akwa Ibom man owns an oil bloc. We live above rivers of wealth but drink from buckets of poverty. We are labeled oil-producing communities, yet outsiders own our oil. We receive derivation crumbs while Abuja and Lagos write the scripts of our suffering.
_*Who then will believe that a new state will break that yoke?*_
Even if Obolo State were carved tomorrow, the same powers controlling oil licenses, security architecture, and political appointments would ensure the people remain voiceless. The very architects of this proposed state will not allow Obolo youths to own an oil bloc. It will become another political territory managed from afar, where sons of the soil are given only ceremonial roles while the wealth flows upward.
*2. Colonial Lines, Legal Favors: How Ibibio Lands Were Protected*
The truth, though hard, must be faced: Colonial administration in Nigeria structurally favored dominant tribes, and in the southeastern corridor, that tribe was the Ibibio.
In the Intelligence Reports of the Calabar Province (1925–1935), a recurring note appears:
*_“The Ibibio have long maintained custodianship of the interior lands, and their political and judicial structure enables clearer land claims than the fragmented coastal dwellers.”_*
(Calabar Provincial Files, NNAE, Calabar Division)
This statement by a British officer speaks volumes. The Ibibio had a structured form of community governance, which was facilitated through the Esop Afe, Village Councils, and Mbong Ekpuk. These systems made them easily governable under indirect rule, and as a result, land titles and territorial authority were more readily documented and legitimized.
Compare that to the Obolo (Andoni) communities, whose riverine dispersion and lineage-based governance created ambiguity in colonial land registration. In the 1937 Andoni Boundary Case, the court favored Ibibio communities:
_*“There exists no formal title to the fishing grounds by the Andoni people… whereas the Ibibio community of Ikot Abasi had colonial records to support land usage.”*_
(Supreme Court of Nigeria, SC/BA/46/1937)
Again in 1942, the Eket-Ibeno Dispute over Okposo land saw British administrators ruling in favor of Eket (an Ibibio subgroup), citing:
*_“Documented settlement and organized traditional institutions.”_*
The legal system favored order—and the Ibibio had it.
While this benefited Ibibio land claims legally, Obolo people did not conduct themselves brotherly as a result of ancient rivalry. Over time, these rivalries and grievances evolved into the modern agitation we now refer to as “Obolo State.”
*3. The Loss of Kinship: Oron, Ibeno, Obolo, and Ibibio*
• Oron and Ibibio
The Oron-Ibibio tension escalated when Ibibio chiefs were appointed to Native Authority positions covering Oron territory. The Calabar Intelligence Reports of 1934 recorded the complaint:
_*“The Oron feel over-governed by Ibibio mandates in the courts and councils of justice.”*_
What began as administrative convenience has now become historical resentment.
*• Ibeno and Ibibio*
The Ibeno—a fishing people—have long claimed ancestral access to coastal lands. However, the Ibeno vs. Eket 2005 court case emphasized the importance of legal documentation over oral tradition. The ruling was based on earlier survey maps from British colonial expeditions conducted in 1904. Thus, legal ownership was separated from cultural memory.
*• Obolo and Ibibio*
Perhaps the most fragile of all relations is that of Obolo and Ibibio. Colonial officers noted frequent clashes over fishing areas and shrines along the Imo River Basin. The 1927 record from the South Eastern Province stated:
*_“Obolo claims to shrines on Ibibio-claimed land must be reconsidered, but the administrative boundary remains as demarcated.”_*
(South Eastern Admin. Reports, 1927)
Even the Shrine of Njoku, claimed by both peoples, became a source of cultural contest rather than spiritual unity.
*4. State Creation Cannot Replace Peace*
No amount of new boundary can restore what communal wounds have torn apart. What we need is not more lines—we need more truth.
Let us understand:
That freedom is not given by Abuja.
That no tribe will find healing in isolation.
That state creation without resource control is just tribal decoration.
Our people must stop believing that a new name on the map equals liberation. Until we own our resources, trust our neighbors, and rewrite our history together, there will be no true independence.
*5. A Prophetic Call for Reconciliation*
This land has witnessed too much bitterness. Yet in the Book of Isaiah 58:12, it is written:
*_“And they that shall be of thee shall build the old waste places: thou shalt raise up the foundations of many generations.”_*
And in Deuteronomy 19:14, God warns:
*_“Thou shalt not remove thy neighbor’s landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance.”_*
These are not just spiritual warnings—they are ancestral truths. We must respect the landmarks, not just of land, but of memory, dignity, and relationship.
*6. Time & Wounds*
Ask yourselves:
Who owns the oil?
Who decides the land ownership?
Who benefits from division?
Not us. Not our parents. Not even our chiefs.
Let us not be the generation that inherited pain and passed it on unprocessed. Let us be the ones who broke the pattern.
*Reflection: The Land Still Waits*
We are living on borrowed time. The rivers, forests, and shrines still whisper our ancestors' names, but we no longer recognize each other. The land waits. It waits not for new states, but for new hearts.
Let Obolo State not become a monument to bitterness, but a turning point—a moment where we say:
“Enough. Let us return—not just to our lands—but to one another.”
Until then, no court victory, no political appointment, no boundary commission will save us. Only truth, only unity, only reconciliation.
