Oil Discovery Turns Okpe-Isoko Into A Battleground! Adhakpor Family Rejects Sterling Global Deal, Alleges Arrest Of Family Head

By Passman Akpos

Tension has reportedly heightened in Okpe-Isoko community, Delta State, following a dispute over a purported land lease agreement allegedly entered into with Sterling Global Limited for the exploration and development of a property where crude oil has reportedly been discovered.

The dispute centres on the authority to negotiate and execute agreements concerning the oil-bearing land, with the Adhakpor family rejecting the purported transaction and insisting that those allegedly involved lacked the mandate to represent its interests.

The development has exposed disagreements over family representation, land ownership and the sharing of potential benefits from the discovery, raising questions about the legitimacy of the negotiation process and the need for transparency in dealings involving the community’s natural resources.

In a statement, the Adhakpor family declared that it neither authorised nor mandated any individual or group to negotiate, execute or enter into a lease agreement, Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) or any related document with Sterling Global Limited concerning its land.

The family described the purported transaction as unauthorised and unacceptable, maintaining that no individual could validly bind it to an agreement without a specific mandate duly granted by the family.

According to the statement, the family’s duly constituted and elected executives, alongside other authorised representatives, had been formally empowered to represent its interests and handle negotiations, engagements and documentation relating to the land.

The family said the representatives emerged from a resolution reached at its general meeting held on October 4, 2026.

It consequently directed that all negotiations, documentation, execution and implementation of any lease or other transaction involving its land must be conducted exclusively through the duly authorised representatives recognised by the family.

It also disassociated itself from any agreement, commitment or undertaking purportedly entered into by individuals acting without its express authorisation.

The family warned prospective investors and other stakeholders to ensure that they deal only with its recognised representatives, stressing that any transaction undertaken outside the authority granted by the family should not be construed as binding on it.

The statement said the position was intended to promote transparency, accountability, proper representation, unity and peace, while protecting the family’s rights and interests.

Family Alleges Exclusion Of Members From Negotiation Committee

The dispute took another turn as the Adhakpor family alleged that a community leader, working with some community members, introduced individuals who were not members of the family into the negotiation committee constituted to discuss the land.

The family strongly opposed the alleged development, insisting that only duly recognised members of the Adhakpor family should participate in committees responsible for negotiating or deliberating on matters concerning its interests.

Speaking to Sunday Vanguard, the Head of the Adhakpor family, Chief Ide Abade, alleged that he was arrested by the community leadership because of his opposition to the purported lease agreement with Sterling Global Limited.

Abade maintained that individuals who were not members of the family lacked the authority to negotiate or enter into agreements concerning its land.

He disclosed that the family had concluded plans to seek redress through the courts over the controversy.

The allegations have heightened concerns about the process through which agreements involving family-owned land and prospective oil exploration activities are negotiated and approved.

However, the circumstances surrounding the alleged arrest and the family’s planned legal action could not be independently established from the available accounts.

Community President-General Disputes Family’s Claims

Reacting to the controversy, the President-General of Okpe-Isoko community, Chief Fred Efeh, offered a different account, insisting that the Adhakpor family was duly represented on the committee constituted to negotiate the lease agreement.

Efeh explained that the disagreement stemmed from a longstanding dispute between two branches, commonly referred to as gates, of the Adhakpor family over ownership of the land where the oil well was reportedly discovered.

According to him, one branch maintained that its forefather had divided the family land and that the portion containing the oil belonged exclusively to it.

He said: “The Adhakpor family they are talking about has two gates. It is one of the gates that has come to complain.”

Efeh explained that one branch claimed the land had been shared by its forefather, arguing that the portion where the oil was discovered belonged solely to it.

He added that the other branch maintained that proceeds from the land, including palm trees and other natural resources, should benefit the entire Adhakpor family rather than a single branch.

“The other one is saying, no, that the palm trees and all other natural resources that may come from there are supposed to be for all of them, not only one gate of the Adhakpor family,” he said.

The community leader maintained that the company involved in the exploration approached the traditional institution and community leadership in accordance with established procedures after the oil discovery.

Efeh said he was present when the company visited the palace and the community, adding that consultations subsequently led to the formation of a negotiation committee comprising representatives of both branches of the Adhakpor family.

He insisted that the family had been adequately represented during the negotiations.

“After fulfilling all normal ways of entering the land, we started negotiation. So the family, these two gates, we now formed a committee for negotiation, where the Adhakpor family people were truly represented,” he stated.

However, Efeh alleged that some representatives later withdrew from the negotiation process, triggering the current disagreement.

“As we were going along on the negotiation, they withdrew,” he said.

His account contrasts with the position of the Adhakpor family, which insists that the purported agreement was not authorised and that those involved lacked the mandate to represent it.

The competing claims leave unresolved questions about the composition of the negotiation committee, the authority granted to its members and whether any agreement was validly executed on behalf of the family.

Sterling Oil Officials Yet To Respond To Controversy

Efforts by Sunday Vanguard to obtain the reaction of the Community Relations Manager of Sterling Oil Exploration and Energy Production Company (SEEPCO), Mr. Rotimi Bakari, were unsuccessful.

Bakari reportedly declined to respond to the queries over the telephone, requesting that the correspondent visit his office in Warri, Delta State, for further discussions.

Efforts to obtain comments from the traditional ruler of Okpe-Isoko, the Ovie of the community, also proved unsuccessful, as calls and messages sent to his telephone lines were neither answered nor acknowledged as of press time.

Consequently, the company’s position on the disputed lease agreement and the family’s allegations remained unclear.

Oil Discovery Raises Questions Over Consent, Ownership And Accountability

The dispute has brought renewed attention to the importance of establishing legitimate representation, resolving competing landownership claims and ensuring transparency before agreements are concluded over land earmarked for oil exploration.

For the Adhakpor family, the central issue is whether the individuals involved in the purported transaction had the authority to act on its behalf.

For the community leadership, the disagreement reflects a deeper dispute between two family branches over ownership of the oil-bearing portion of the land and entitlement to proceeds from its natural resources.

Until the competing claims are properly clarified, the controversy could complicate negotiations and deepen divisions within the family and the wider community.

Key questions remain unanswered: Who has the legal authority to represent the Adhakpor family? Was a lease agreement actually executed, and if so, by whom? What procedures were followed before the purported transaction? And what safeguards are in place to ensure that the interests of the rightful landowners are protected?

The answers may ultimately depend on the relevant landownership records, the mandate given to the negotiation committee, any agreement executed by the parties and, should the dispute proceed to court, the findings of the judiciary.

For now, the controversy underscores the need for all parties to establish the facts, respect legitimate ownership rights and pursue a transparent resolution that prevents the reported oil discovery from becoming a source of prolonged conflict.