There is a growing controversy regarding the authenticity of the signatures allegedly signed by some Local Government Chairmen and members of the Delta State House of Assembly who reportedly rejected the proposed creation of Anioma State.
Concerns Over Signature Verification
Sources within the state government and political circles indicate a significant concern that many of the signatures used to reject the state’s creation may be fraudulent.
The report suggests that while some Delta State House members may have genuinely appended their signatures to express their “dismay” over the proposed state being zoned to the South-East, there are palpable indications that a large portion of the signatures were fake
Recall for the push for Anioma State is reportedly aligned with the interest of the Nigerian President, whose stated aim is to balance the current regional and geopolitical imbalance by ensuring the South-East zone has parity with other zones, potentially raising the number of states in the zone to six.
The press release was to originally associated with Mr. Charles Aniagwu featured the list of officials rejecting the proposal.
However, interviews with local residents and political stakeholders suggest a discrepancy in the level of opposition.
The document purported that all Local Government Chairmen and House of Assembly members from Delta North rejected the proposal.
It was gathered that a notable exception was the House of Assembly member representing Ika South, who reportedly acknowledged the political and developmental importance of bringing Anioma State into existence.
Sources suggest that the opposition is not against state creation itself, but rather against the proposed zoning of the new state to the South-East geopolitical zone.
Moreover, the people of Delta North hinted that fighting the zoning of Anioma to the South-East does not truly want the creation of Anioma State, as the state’s very purpose was to achieve that regional balance,” a political analyst commented.
The sentiment indicates that the rejection is rooted in the political affiliations of a few powerful individuals, possibly those aligned with the immediate past Governor, who oppose the South-East zoning framework that is central to the state’s justification.
