The evergreen words of French enlightenment philosopher, Francois-Marie Arouet, more popular as Voltaire, that “those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,” flashed through my mind as I watched Dr. Sam Amadi, a lawyer, teacher and rights advocate for the Ngor-Okpala people in Imo state, address journalists at the Press Center of the FCT Chapter of the Nigerian Union of journalists (NUJ) in Abuja on May 28, 2025, wherein he made comments that are considered, by reasonable members of the larger society, as inciting the people of Ngor-Okpala against the people of Orlu.
Specifically, Sam Amadi said: “The dangerous dimension of this crisis is that the whole of Ngor-Okpala now feel that they are being oppressed by the people of Orlu zone.” He also said that “this is a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul.” Amadi, who used to be the Chairman of the Nigerian Electricity Regulation Commission (NERC), further stated that “this has a layer, a layer that can lead to conflict.” He concluded his statement by saying that “this is just a hostile takeover through the use of government power.” For emphasis, the issue here relates to the provision of land by the Imo State Government for development purposes by the Zion Ministries led by Pastor Ebuka Obi, which development includes churches, schools, and hospitals, among others.
Amadi also stated at the press conference that “…Orlu zone has no issues with this.” That leaves one wondering his intention in stating emphatically that the people of Ngor-Okpala feel that the people of Orlu zone are oppressing them. By stating that “the people of Orlu zone have no issues with this”, Dr. Amadi cleverly suggests that people of Orlu zone, like me, have no issues with oppressing Ngor-Okpala people through the “hostile takeover” of their land. In other words, he suggests, strongly too, that the people of Orlu zone, including me, are fully behind the “hostile takeover” of Ngor-Okpala land. Further to this, he insinuates that the takeover of the land in question was an act surreptitiously carried out by Orlu people through the Imo state government in an action that would transfer the ownership of the land to the people of Orlu zone, which is akin to “robbing Peter to pay Paul”.
One is at a loss as to how an academic would profess such a level of ignorance over matters to which the state government has powers and seek to incite the people of Ngor-Okpala to action against the people of Orlu zone. His comment to the effect that “this has a layer, a layer that can lead to conflict,” incites the people of Ngor-Okpala to violence against the people of Orlu zone, not excluding me. So, despite my residing outside Imo state, I could become a victim of mob action by the people of Ngor-Okpala for the mere fact that Dr. Amadi has planted an idea into their minds that the ‘people of Orlu zone are oppressing them’ through the ‘hostile takeover’ of their land through an action of the Imo state government which robs “Peter to pay Paul,’ an action which also can ‘lead to conflict.’ This incitement also suggests that Orlu people may become targets of terrorism, depending on who interprets it, for the mere fact that Governor Hope Uzodimma, who discharged this constitutional responsibility of providing land for investment by Zion Ministries, is from the Orlu zone.
Get my drift! The Land Use Act (1978) vests all land in the state in the governor. This means that every state government has control over the allocation, use and management of land within its borders. It also indicates that a governor has the power to determine to what purpose land could be allocated while also ensuring that such allocation aligns with the development goals of the state. Therefore, if allocating land to Zion Ministries for the development of churches, schools, hospitals etc, aligns with the development objectives of the state, what then is the need to incite Ngor-Okpala people against Orlu people? Is it that Dr. Amadi is blind to the possibility of his words inciting people of Ngor-Okpala to sabotage whatever development Zion Ministries intends to subject the land to?
It is, however, interesting to see Dr. Amadi become a patriotic advocate for the development and good of Ngor-Okpala. And for this, I am tempted to ask him to publish the details of the beneficial value of his chairmanship of NERC to the Ngor-Okpala people, in particular, and Imo State generally. While this will help to properly situate his advocacy for the rights of the people of Ngor-Okpala, it will also help broaden his sights on the governorship of Imo State after Uzodimma. Get me right, I do not suggest that Ngor-Okpala people have no right to question the government over the takeover of their land. They have rights, and the proper place to exercise such rights is the judiciary, a temple where Dr. Amadi is a priest. So, rather than incite a ‘conflict’ between Ngor-Okpala and Orlu people, under the cloak of patriotism, Amadi could as well have led the people to pursue their rights in court.
Let me also assume, but not concede, that Dr. Amadi sees in this issue an opportunity to advance his interest in the governorship of Imo State. He is eminently qualified to aspire to govern Imo State. He is also in his constitutional rights to aspire to be voted for. However, attempting to create a crisis in Imo state through inciting Ngor-Okpala against Orlu people does not in any way advance a governorship ambition. It destroys it instead. Reasonable members of the public will, no doubt, ask questions about the character of an individual who wants to lead a state but would rather incite the public against the government and another section of society. Perhaps, it is for this reality that T.S. Elliot said that “most of the trouble in the world is caused by people wanting to be important.” Douglas Adams added to this when he said, “To summarise: it is a well-known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.”
Perhaps, Dr. Amadi should review his comments at the press conference to understand that Imo state needs peace, not “a layer that can lead to conflict.” It is normal to disagree with the decisions of the government. But something is wrong when we creatively incite people to violent conduct rather than seek legal means to challenge supposed wrongs. That is not the best way to seek to be relevant in the governance process.