Apples Bite International Magazine reports that the palace of the Olu of Warri has rejected a claim by Asari Dokubo that His Majesty Ogiame Atuwatse III, CFR, collects ₦2.7 trillion every year from pipeline surveillance contracts. The palace has also challenged Dokubo to show the evidence.
The palace made its position known in a press statement dated Tuesday, 6 October 2026, a copy of which was seen by Apples Bite. The statement was signed by Prince Collins Oritsetimeyin Edema, Sole Representative of the Olu of Warri to NNPC Limited and its Joint Venture partners.
According to the statement, the claim was too serious to ignore. It said the claim could affect “the reputation of the Olu of Warri” and the “strategic importance of pipeline surveillance to the Nigerian state.” For that reason, it said, a public and direct reply was needed.
“For the avoidance of doubt,” the statement said, “the allegation that the Olu of Warri receives ₦2.7 trillion annually from pipeline surveillance contracts is categorically rejected.” In plain words, the palace says the claim is false. The statement added: “We challenge Mr. Dokubo to produce the documentary evidence upon which this extraordinary claim is based.” In other words, the palace wants him to bring papers that back up what he said.
The statement then turned to Dokubo himself. It said his latest comments “cannot be divorced entirely from the persona he has cultivated over several decades.” According to the statement, his political name was “forged in an era of militancy and armed agitation in the Niger Delta,” and he still speaks in the same hard and combative way.
The statement said his words are “frequently categorical, provocative and insufficiently restrained.” It noted that this style “may command attention,” but it argued that “attention should not be confused with credibility, and forcefulness should not be mistaken for evidence.” Put simply, the palace says that speaking loudly does not make a claim true.
The statement said a person with Dokubo’s history has a duty to know the difference between three things: an allegation, a guess drawn from other facts, and a proven fact.
The palace also explained why it believes the matter is so sensitive. According to the statement, pipeline surveillance contracts “are not ordinary commercial arrangements.” It described Nigeria’s oil and gas pipelines as “a critical national asset.” The statement said that protecting them affects how much crude oil is produced, how much money government earns, how much foreign exchange comes in, and how stable the national economy is.
Because of this, the statement argued, pipeline surveillance “sits at the intersection of commercial interest, energy security and national security.” It said that makes the way these contracts are given out and carried out a proper matter of public interest, one that should face “particularly rigorous scrutiny.” It then set a standard for proof, saying “the higher the national-security implications, the higher the evidentiary threshold should be.” This means that the more serious the matter is for the country, the stronger the proof must be.
The statement also warned about the risk of careless talk in the Niger Delta. It said that when claims are made about the Olu of Warri, Pipeline Infrastructure Nigeria Limited (PINL), Tompolo or other players, in a place already tense on ethnic lines, “loose or unguarded assertions can have consequences beyond the immediate argument.” According to the statement, such words “can reinforce suspicions, revive old grievances and provide ammunition for people who would rather interpret every disagreement through an ethnic lens.”
The statement reminded readers of the history of the area. It said the Warri question “involves communities with long and complicated histories of grievance and competition.” It added that “Ijaw, Itsekiri and Urhobo relations require responsible leadership, not rhetoric that can easily be interpreted as provocation.” According to the statement, at a time when stakeholders are working to keep the peace and stop old quarrels from becoming new conflicts, public figures who join the debate “carry an obligation to exercise restraint.”
The statement also raised what it called a question of consistency. It recalled that Dokubo had at different times attacked Tompolo over the pipeline-security arrangement and the wider Gbaramatu-Itsekiri dispute, and had more recently defended Tompolo against criticism and directed allegations elsewhere.
The statement was careful on this point. It said such changes “do not, by themselves, prove bad faith,” and that “political positions can change.” But it argued they make it reasonable for the public to ask what has changed, what evidence supports the new position, and whether his latest comments are driven by principle, politics, personal alliances or a mix of these.
The palace also made clear that it was not asking Nigerians to ignore Dokubo completely. According to the statement, “the temptation should not be to dismiss everything Dokubo says simply because of his militant past.” It called that approach “intellectually lazy.” The statement said the opposite is also wrong, because his name as “a fierce Niger Delta voice” should not give his claims “automatic credibility.” In its words, his claims “must stand or fall on the quality of the evidence supporting them.”
The statement named the real danger as politically charged allegations taking the place of proof. It said that if there are worries about a pipeline-security arrangement, the contracts, procurement processes, company records, government approvals, performance reports and regulatory documents should be checked. It added that if wrongdoing is alleged, the proper institutions should investigate and establish the facts.
The statement summed up its position in two lines: “Whoever makes the allegation should provide the evidence. Whoever is accused should have the opportunity to respond.”
It closed with a reminder of what the region has already suffered. According to the statement, the Niger Delta “has paid a heavy price for politics conducted through confrontation and inflammatory rhetoric.” It said it would be “deeply unfortunate” if old habits of militancy and careless speech were allowed to reopen ethnic fears that responsible stakeholders are trying to leave behind.
“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 statement concluded that pipeline security “is ultimately about more than contracts.” It said the issue is about protecting national assets, safeguarding economic activity and securing an important part of Nigeria’s economic survival. That duty, it said, “demands facts, accountability and institutional oversight, not inflammatory rhetoric, ethnic suspicion or the force of individual personalities.”
