NEWS
Olu of Warri Palace Rejects Asari Dokubo’s ₦2.7trn Pipeline Surveillance Claim, Challenges Him to Produce Evidence
The Palace of the Olu of Warri has strongly rejected a claim attributed to Niger Delta activist, Asari Dokubo, that His Majesty Ogiame Atuwatse III, CFR, receives ₦2.7 trillion annually from pipeline surveillance contracts, demanding that Dokubo provide documentary evidence to substantiate the allegation.
The Palace described the claim as a serious allegation that cannot be ignored, particularly because of its potential implications for the reputation of the Olu of Warri and the broader national importance of pipeline surveillance in Nigeria’s oil-producing region.
The position was contained in a press statement dated Tuesday, October 6, 2026, signed by Prince Collins Oritsetimeyin Edema, Sole Representative of the Olu of Warri to NNPC Limited and its Joint Venture partners. A copy of the statement was seen by Apples Bite International Magazine.
The Palace said the allegation warranted a direct and public response because of the sensitivity surrounding pipeline security, oil production and the longstanding ethnic and political tensions in parts of the Niger Delta.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the allegation that the Olu of Warri receives ₦2.7 trillion annually from pipeline surveillance contracts is categorically rejected,“ the statement said
The Palace went further, throwing down a direct challenge to Dokubo to substantiate his claim.
“We challenge Mr. Dokubo to produce the documentary evidence upon which this extraordinary claim is based,” he added.
The challenge places the burden squarely on the person who made the allegation, with the Palace insisting that a claim of such magnitude should not be sustained by rhetoric, speculation or political assertions without verifiable documentation.
The Palace also addressed Dokubo’s public profile and the manner in which he has historically engaged with political and security issues in the Niger Delta.
According to the statement, Dokubo’s latest comments “cannot be divorced entirely from the persona he has cultivated over several decades.”
It said his political identity was “forged in an era of militancy and armed agitation in the Niger Delta,” adding that his public interventions have continued to reflect a forceful and combative style.
The Palace described his statements as “frequently categorical, provocative and insufficiently restrained,” acknowledging that such an approach “may command attention,” but stressing that “attention should not be confused with credibility, and forcefulness should not be mistaken for evidence.”
It argued that individuals making serious public allegations, particularly those involving prominent traditional institutions, major commercial interests and national security, have a responsibility to distinguish between an allegation, an inference and an established fact.
The Palace subsequently drew attention to the strategic importance of pipeline surveillance to Nigeria, arguing that the issue goes far beyond ordinary commercial transactions.
According to the statement, pipeline surveillance contracts “are not ordinary commercial arrangements,” because Nigeria’s oil and gas pipelines constitute “a critical national asset.”
It explained that the protection of the country’s oil infrastructure has direct implications for crude oil production, government revenue, foreign exchange earnings and the stability of the national economy.
The Palace therefore maintained that pipeline surveillance “sits at the intersection of commercial interest, energy security and national security.”
Because of this, it said, the award, administration and performance of such contracts deserve “particularly rigorous scrutiny.”
The statement established what it described as an appropriate standard for allegations involving national security, saying, “the higher the national-security implications, the higher the evidentiary threshold should be.”
The Palace also expressed concern over the possible consequences of unverified claims in the Niger Delta, especially when prominent individuals and organisations are involved.
It specifically referenced discussions surrounding the Olu of Warri, Pipeline Infrastructure Nigeria Limited (PINL), Tompolo and other stakeholders, warning that “loose or unguarded assertions can have consequences beyond the immediate argument.”
According to the statement, such claims “can reinforce suspicions, revive old grievances and provide ammunition for people who would rather interpret every disagreement through an ethnic lens.”
The Palace recalled the complex history of the Warri area, noting that the region has experienced longstanding grievances and competition involving different communities.
It said the Warri question “involves communities with long and complicated histories of grievance and competition.”
The statement further stressed that “Ijaw, Itsekiri and Urhobo relations require responsible leadership, not rhetoric that can easily be interpreted as provocation.”
Against the backdrop of ongoing efforts by stakeholders to maintain peace and prevent historical disputes from escalating, the Palace said public figures participating in such debates have a responsibility to exercise restraint.
The statement also questioned what it described as apparent shifts in Dokubo’s positions concerning Tompolo and the pipeline-security arrangement.
It recalled that Dokubo had, at different times, criticised Tompolo over the pipeline-security arrangement and the broader Gbaramatu-Itsekiri dispute, while more recently defending Tompolo against criticism and directing allegations towards other actors.
However, the Palace acknowledged that changing political positions do not automatically establish wrongdoing.
It said such changes “do not, by themselves, prove bad faith,” adding that “political positions can change.”
Nevertheless, it argued that the shifts make it legitimate for members of the public to ask what has changed, what evidence supports the new position and whether the latest statements are motivated by principle, politics, personal alliances or a combination of factors.
The Palace also cautioned against two extremes in assessing Dokubo’s statements.
It said “the temptation should not be to dismiss everything Dokubo says simply because of his militant past,” describing such an approach as “intellectually lazy.”
At the same time, it warned that his reputation as “a fierce Niger Delta voice” should not automatically confer credibility on every allegation he makes.
According to the statement, his claims “must stand or fall on the quality of the evidence supporting them.”
The Palace argued that the appropriate way to address concerns about pipeline-security contracts is through documentation, institutional scrutiny and established investigative processes rather than public accusations.
It said relevant contracts, procurement processes, company records, government approvals, performance reports and regulatory documents should be examined whenever questions arise over a pipeline-security arrangement.
Where wrongdoing is alleged, it added, the appropriate government institutions should investigate the matter and establish the facts.
The Palace summarised its position with two principles: “Whoever makes the allegation should provide the evidence. Whoever is accused should have the opportunity to respond.”
It also used the opportunity to warn against the return of the kind of inflammatory political rhetoric that has historically contributed to instability in the Niger Delta.
According to the statement, the region “has paid a heavy price for politics conducted through confrontation and inflammatory rhetoric.”
The Palace said it would be “deeply unfortunate” if old patterns of militancy and careless public statements were allowed to reopen ethnic tensions that responsible stakeholders have been working to resolve.
“The central question, therefore, is not whether Asari Dokubo can command attention,” the statement said. “He plainly can. The question is whether the substance of what he is saying can survive independent scrutiny.”
The Palace ultimately framed the controversy as a much broader national issue, insisting that pipeline surveillance should not be reduced to a political confrontation between individuals or competing interests.
It said pipeline security “is ultimately about more than contracts,” stressing that the matter involves the protection of critical national infrastructure, the safeguarding of economic activity and the security of a significant component of Nigeria’s economic survival.
That responsibility, the Palace concluded, “demands facts, accountability and institutional oversight, not inflammatory rhetoric, ethnic suspicion or the force of individual personalities.”