Leaders of the Itsekiri nation have formally rejected substantial portions of the Itsekiri INEC report on the proposed delineation of wards, polling units, state constituencies, and a new federal constituency within the Warri Federal Constituency. The leaders said they support lawful electoral reforms and constitutional compliance but argued that the Independent National Electoral Commission’s proposal released on May 20, 2026, falls short of legal and operational requirements.
The position was presented during a press briefing in Warri, Delta State, by Secretary of the Itsekiri Leaders of Thought, Sir Amorighoye Sunny Mene.
Mene addressed journalists alongside prominent Itsekiri leaders, including Edward Ekpoko, Prince Yemi Emiko, A. Mene, Alex Eyengho, and Robinson Ariyon. Speaking on behalf of the Itsekiri Ethnic Nationality (IEN), Mene said the group considered it necessary to clarify its position regarding the proposed delineation exercise and respond to what it described as media propaganda from certain Ijaw and Urhobo interests.
According to him, the Itsekiri nation remains committed to democratic processes and constitutional governance.
Mene stressed that the Itsekiri people were not opposed to ward delineation when conducted in accordance with constitutional provisions. “We fully respect the judgment of the Supreme Court in Suit No. SC/143/2016, which directed INEC to conduct a fresh delineation exercise in Warri South, Warri South-West and Warri North Local Government Areas,” he said.
He emphasized that the Itsekiri nation recognizes the authority of the Supreme Court and supports lawful efforts aimed at improving electoral representation. However, he maintained that support for the court’s judgment does not translate into acceptance of every aspect of the current Itsekiri INEC report.
The Itsekiri leaders said they “firmly reject” the delineation proposal unveiled by INEC in Asaba on May 20, 2026. According to Mene, the proposal contains significant legal and procedural shortcomings that undermine its credibility and legitimacy.
“In our considered view, this exercise violates explicit constitutional provisions, disregards the Electoral Act 2026 (as amended), breaches INEC’s own operational guidelines, and relies on deeply flawed, disputed fieldwork and GIS mapping processes,” he stated.
The group argued that the current Itsekiri INEC report failed to meet standards required under Nigeria’s electoral framework.
Itsekiri leaders cited provisions of the 1999 Constitution as the foundation for their objections. According to them, the Constitution establishes a clear legal framework governing electoral delineation exercises, including the creation and adjustment of wards and constituencies. Mene argued that any electoral exercise must strictly comply with these provisions to ensure fairness, legitimacy, and public confidence.
He further noted that the Electoral Act 2026 and INEC’s operational guidelines provide detailed requirements that must guide such exercises. The leaders contend that the Itsekiri INEC report does not adequately reflect these requirements.
The Itsekiri delegation also raised concerns about the methodology used during the fieldwork and mapping process. According to Mene, INEC’s operational guidelines require that electoral wards reflect proportionality, geographical contiguity, community identity, cultural balance, and established local government boundaries. He argued that these principles were not sufficiently respected in the proposal released by the commission.
The leaders said community identity and historical boundaries remain important considerations in any electoral delineation exercise and should not be ignored. These concerns form a central part of the objections to the Itsekiri INEC report.
While reiterating support for constitutional reforms and inclusive representation, the Itsekiri nation called for a review of aspects of the delineation proposal it considers inconsistent with legal and operational standards.
The leaders maintained that their position should not be interpreted as opposition to electoral reform but rather as a demand for a process that complies fully with constitutional provisions and established guidelines. They urged stakeholders to focus on facts, legal requirements, and due process in resolving the issues surrounding the exercise.
