INEC Confusing Court Judgments on Warri Constituency Delineation — Chief Robinson Ariyo

Warri, Delta State — Legal practitioner and human rights activist, Chief Robinson Ariyo, has accused the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of conflating separate court judgments relating to the delineation of constituencies in the Warri Federal Constituency, describing the commission’s actions as legally flawed and inconsistent.

Speaking on the ongoing controversy surrounding constituency delineation in Delta State, Ariyo said INEC had, over the past two years, sought to implement a court judgment directing it to undertake a re-delineation of the Warri Federal Constituency.

According to him, the commission cannot lawfully implement such a judgment without first completing its report, forwarding it to the National Assembly, and waiting for the expiration of the tenure of the current House of Assembly, as stipulated by law.

Ariyo alleged that following sustained legal advocacy by the Itsekiri ethnic group, INEC appears to have shifted from enforcing the re-delineation judgment and is now relying on a separate court ruling concerning the restoration of allegedly suppressed constituencies.

He argued that the judgment on suppressed constituencies does not apply to the Warri situation and is being deployed to circumvent constitutional provisions requiring the involvement of the National Assembly and the expiration of the current legislative tenure.

“In effect, the Supreme Court judgment regarding the re-delineation of Warri Federal Constituency has been shamelessly jettisoned,” Ariyo said. “Even those who obtained the judgment have now agreed that Warri Federal Constituency should be treated as a case of suppressed constituencies.”

He maintained that the commission’s current position is fundamentally flawed, insisting that constituencies cannot be restored if they never existed in the first place, nor can they be deemed suppressed if they were never established.

Ariyo specifically cited Warri North Constituency II and Warri South-West Constituency II, arguing that neither had previously existed, unlike constituencies in areas such as Sapele, Ethiope, and Anioma, where historical precedents for restoration could be established.

He noted that this distinction was among the reasons recent consultations on constituency matters excluded the Warri Federal Constituency.

“You cannot claim to be enforcing a court judgment while simultaneously engaging in actions contrary to the law and relying on force to achieve your objectives,” he added.

The comments come amid ongoing debates over constituency delineation and representation in Delta State, with stakeholders expressing divergent views on the legal and constitutional implications of INEC’s actions.

This version adopts a neutral news style while preserving Chief Ariyo’s claims and attributing them appropriately.