“WHO IS AFRAID OF BOYLOAF?” — Ezetu Disowns Viral Platform as Fresh Questions Hit Tompolo Camp
By Passman Akpos
The controversy surrounding Ezetu Voice TV has taken a fresh turn, with community leaders rallying behind former Niger Delta militant leader High Chief Ebikabowei Victor-Ben, popularly known as Boyloaf, while demanding answers over the identity and motive of those behind the controversial platform.
The dispute erupted after Ezetu Voice TV published allegations concerning an alleged meeting involving Boyloaf, his brother Hon. Victor Selekeye, and Niger Delta figure High Chief Government Ekpemupolo, popularly known as Tompolo, in Oporoza.
The publication also made an allegation involving an alleged $250,000 payment.
However, those allegations have been strongly rejected by the Bilabiri Community leadership, which described the publication as false and malicious propaganda.
More significantly, Ezetu Youth Council President Sylvanus Joseph has publicly distanced Ezetu Kingdom from Ezetu Voice TV, saying investigations had failed to establish anyone from Ezetu Kingdom as the known operator of the platform.
That declaration has transformed what initially appeared to be another social-media clash into a much bigger question:
Who is behind Ezetu Voice TV, and whose interests is the platform serving?
BOYLOAF GETS COMMUNITY BACKING
Rather than accepting the allegations against Boyloaf, the Bilabiri Community leadership came out strongly in his defence.
In a statement signed by Chief Tekenane Abaka, CDC Chairman of Bilabiri Community, and the entire executive, the community rejected the story portraying Boyloaf as someone who allegedly went to Oporoza to beg for forgiveness.
The community also rejected the alleged financial transaction contained in the publication.
According to the statement, Boyloaf is a man whose decisions are guided by principle and dignity rather than financial inducement.
Whether every historical claim contained in the statement can withstand independent verification is a separate matter. But politically, the message from the community is unmistakable:
They will not allow Boyloaf’s reputation to be defined by anonymous or disputed social-media publications.
EZETU YOUTH PRESIDENT: “THIS IS NOT OUR VOICE”
The strongest development, however, came from Ezetu itself.
The Ezetu Youth President’s decision to distance the kingdom from Ezetu Voice TV has created a major credibility problem for the platform.
If a media platform carries the name of a kingdom but the kingdom’s youth leadership says it does not know or recognise its operators, the obvious question becomes:
Who authorised the platform to speak in the name of Ezetu?
That question is particularly important because one of its recent targets is one of Ezetu’s most prominent sons.
WHY BOYLOAF REMAINS A POWERFUL FIGURE
For his supporters, Boyloaf’s place in Niger Delta history cannot be erased by a Facebook publication.
His name remains associated with the militant phase of the Niger Delta struggle and the broader agitation over environmental degradation, resource control and the treatment of oil-producing communities.
The Bilabiri statement further highlighted his educational achievements and described him as a strategist and gentleman who transitioned from conflict into peace and public engagement.
Supporters argue that whatever political disagreements exist today, Boyloaf’s historical contribution should be assessed through evidence and history—not through anonymous accusations.
THE TOMPOLO QUESTION
The controversy has inevitably dragged Tompolo into the centre of the debate because the disputed publication allegedly concerns an encounter involving him and Boyloaf.
The Bilabiri statement makes strong accusations against Tompolo and his associates, portraying the relationship between the two Niger Delta figures through a deeply adversarial lens.
Tarakirivoice has not independently verified those accusations and therefore does not present them as established facts.
But the allegations have nevertheless raised an uncomfortable political question:
Why has the relationship between two prominent Niger Delta figures repeatedly become ammunition for social-media battles?
If Tompolo or anyone associated with him has no connection whatsoever with Ezetu Voice TV, a clear public denial and evidence-based explanation could help settle the speculation.
If there is evidence linking the platform to individuals close to him, that evidence should be presented publicly rather than left to social-media conjecture.
BOYLOAF DOES NOT NEED ANONYMOUS DEFENDERS
Perhaps the most striking feature of the controversy is that Boyloaf’s strongest defence has not come from an anonymous social-media account.
It has come from community voices.
The Bilabiri leadership has challenged the allegations directly, while the Ezetu Youth President has questioned whether the controversial platform has any legitimate connection with Ezetu Kingdom.
That combination puts the spotlight back on the operators of Ezetu Voice TV.
Let them identify themselves.
Let them explain who funds the platform.
Let them explain who gives them information.
Let them provide evidence for their allegations.
And, most importantly, let them explain why they are using the name of Ezetu Kingdom.
THE BIGGER NIGER DELTA LESSON
The controversy exposes a dangerous trend in Niger Delta politics: the increasing use of social media to settle leadership disputes, attack personalities and manipulate community identities.
A kingdom should not become a weapon in a personal political battle.
A community name should not be used to give anonymous publications an artificial appearance of legitimacy.
And allegations involving respected Niger Delta figures should not be treated as facts simply because they appear on Facebook.
TARAKIRIVOICE: EVIDENCE OVER PROPAGANDA
Boyloaf’s supporters have made their position clear.
Ezetu Youth leadership has made its position clear.
Bilabiri Community leadership has made its position clear.
Now the responsibility falls on Ezetu Voice TV.
Who are you?
Who operates you?
Who funds you?
Who authorised you to speak using the name “Ezetu”?
And what evidence do you have for the allegations published against Boyloaf?
Until those questions are answered, the public has every reason to treat the disputed publication with caution.
For Boyloaf, the controversy may ultimately become less about the allegation itself and more about the question of who is attempting to define his legacy through anonymous social-media warfare.
For Tompolo and everyone mentioned in the dispute, the same standard applies: evidence should speak louder than propaganda, and public accusations should be backed by verifiable facts.
The Niger Delta deserves better than hidden operators, community-name politics and unverified allegations.
It deserves transparency.
It deserves evidence.
And above all, it deserves the truth.
