AKOIYAK Protest Grounds Eket …Demands Gazetted Map

By The Evangelist edition September 29, 2022.

Economic activities in Eket was Tuesday grounded for hours when a large crowd of patriotic citizens took to the streets in protest against attempt by the state government to annex the Stubb Creek Forest Reserve (Akoiyak) legitimately owned by the people of Eket and Esit Eket Local Government Councils to Ibeno.

The protesters also demanded the immediate release of an official gazetted map of the state to determine the rightful owner of the said land amongst other issues listed in the placards during the peaceful demonstration on the gateway of the city.

In his address to the protesters at Ekid People’s Union (EPU) Secretariat, the national president of the union Dr. Samuel Udonsak speaking through chief Bassey Dan Abia (jnr) the secretary general, averred, Akoiyak (Stubb Creek Forest) is not in dispute but the bonafide property of Eket Nation through inheritance from our forebears, judgement of courts of competent jurisdiction which had never been appealed by the Ibeno People, extant laws of Cross River and Akwa Ibom State, recommendation of panels of enquiries amongst other decisions on this issue.
The union had written severally to the State Government to enforce these judgements, but regrettably the Government failed to enforce it.

“These therefore is a wake-up call to defend Akoiyak, even as over 210 hectares of it had been leased to Bua Group, without our knowledge and consent. If this act is not stopped now, it is a time bomb.” Abia said.

‘’The statement by Governor Udom Emmanuel that land is vested in the government does not deprive us of our proprietary right, interest or title to Akoiyak, as creation of new local government or states can’t usurp that right’’ Abia disclosed.

According to him, the Supreme Court judgement of 1916, Per Weber J, privy council judgement of 1918, appeal court judgement of 1918, decisions of Ephraim Akpata’s commission of 1993, Federal High Court judgement of 2003, State High Court judgement of 2002, that ordered Akwa Ibom state government to produce an authentic map of the state, High Court judgement of 2010 on the right of Qua Iboe Terminal (QIT), several letters mandating government and companies to pay compensation and entitlement on QIT / stubb creek forest to Ekid nation on this matter cannot be swept under the carpet.

Some inscription on the placards reads, “Ak government stop manipulation and deprivation”, “EPU on a peaceful protest to drive home the truth/ facts on Ekid ownership of Akoiyak”, “Akoiyak rightly belongs to Ekid nation”, “ownership of Stubb Creek not disputed, 100% Ekid”.

In his address to protesters who converged at the Council Secretariat, a spokesperson for the youth, Daniel Essien, emphasized, Akoiyak Ekid is the correct name of the land and cautioned Mr. William Mkpa, Ibeno council boss against his inciting, provocative and unguarded utterances and claims that Ekid nation no longer littoral councils, ‘’insist we shall rise to claim back our land’’.

A representative of the women, Obonganwan Jane Akpan, noted, they have cried for decades on the ownership status of Akoiyak and appealed to the state governor as a peace loving father to approve a gazzated map of the state to address this issue before it snowballs into crises as the women and children will be affected most.

Alternatively, if they government can’t produce the map, they should rely or revert to the 1987 map before the creation of Akwa Ibom State which clearly depicts Eket and Esit Eket as littoral councils, even as Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited (MPNU) signed an understanding with representatives of Eket and Esit Eket Local Government Areas.

In a chat with Prince Ekanem Edohoeket, he disclosed that Ekid nation had established ownership of Akoiyak since 1916 when Ibeno fought among themselves to claim ownership of the land and lost woefully.

Several cases have been decided in favour of Ekid nation who exercised ownership and received tribute, while several appeals by Ibeno suffered losses in all the courts. With the decision of the privy council, no court in the land can entertain this matter again.

“We must therefore defend what our forebears handed over to us” he concluded.