Bori State Demand Gains Momentum Amid Renewed Debate Over Ogoni Oil Resumption

The demand for the creation of Bori State is gaining renewed prominence in Ogoniland as disagreements over representation, environmental protection, community benefits and the proposed resumption of oil exploration continue to dominate discussions about the future of the area.

The latest call was made by Burabari Sunday Deezia, PhD., who argued that the creation of Bori State should receive serious and urgent consideration as part of efforts to address what he described as the longstanding political and socioeconomic challenges confronting the Ogoni people.

His position comes amid increasing tension around the Ogoni Dialogue Committee, established by the Federal Government to facilitate discussions with Ogoni stakeholders on the possible resumption of oil production in Ogoniland.

In recent weeks, different Ogoni groups have raised concerns about the composition of the dialogue process, representation, transparency, environmental safeguards and the distribution of potential benefits from any renewed oil activities.

Ogoni youths, under the Ogoni Youths Development Initiative, recently demanded the creation of Bori State as a condition for oil resumption and called for the dissolution of the Ogoni Dialogue Committee, saying they had lost confidence in its composition.

Similarly, the apex socio-political organisation, KAGOTE, has called for greater clarity and transparency in the dialogue process, particularly over reported oil-related activities and the conditions surrounding a possible return to oil production. A member of the dialogue committee, Rev. Fr. Pius Kii, also said issues including equity participation, community ownership and host-community benefits should be settled before irreversible decisions are taken.

Against this backdrop, Deezia argued that the debate should extend beyond whether oil exploration should resume to the broader question of Ogoni's political future.

According to him, the creation of Bori State would provide a dedicated administrative and institutional framework through which the aspirations and development priorities of the Ogoni people could be pursued.

He identified potential state institutions that could emerge under Bori State, including ministries responsible for agriculture, budget and economic planning, chieftaincy and community affairs, commerce and industry, culture and tourism, education, energy and natural resources, employment generation and empowerment, environment, finance, health, housing, information and communications, justice, lands and survey, local government affairs, power, social welfare, special duties, sports, transport, urban development, water resources and rural development, women affairs, works and other sectors.

Deezia maintained that the significance of state creation should not be reduced to the number of political offices that would be created.

Rather, he said, the proposed state could provide opportunities for stronger institutional representation, improved public service delivery, economic planning, human-capital development and greater participation of Ogoni people in decisions affecting their communities.

He further argued that the establishment of Bori State could create employment opportunities through government institutions, local government administration, education, infrastructure, agriculture, environmental remediation and the expansion of private-sector activities.

However, he acknowledged that state creation alone would not automatically eliminate unemployment, poverty or governance challenges.

According to him, its potential value lies in providing an institutional platform through which those challenges could be addressed more directly and systematically.

The demand for Bori State is not entirely new. Ogoni stakeholders have repeatedly raised state creation as part of their political demands, including during consultations on the proposed resumption of oil activities. In February 2025, communities in Ogoniland demanded the creation of a state from the four local government areas that make up Ogoniland, with Bori proposed as the capital.

The issue also featured prominently during the 2026 Ogoni Day celebrations in Bori, where Ogoni leaders renewed calls for the creation of Bori State.

More recently, the Ogoni Dialogue Committee itself acknowledged that the creation of Bori State remains among the demands presented to the Federal Government. The committee said it had established a tactical sub-committee to work on the modalities, while noting that any state-creation process would have to follow constitutional procedures.

For Deezia, the renewed debate provides an opportunity for Ogoni leaders to look beyond immediate disagreements over oil and develop a broader political and socioeconomic agenda.

He cautioned against allowing the oil-resumption debate to overshadow what he considers the more enduring question of institutional development and political empowerment.

“Oil is a finite resource; institutional capacity, human development, and accountable self-governance are more enduring assets,” he argued.

He therefore urged Ogoni stakeholders to broaden the conversation and consider Bori State as a central demand in negotiations concerning the future of Ogoniland.

The argument comes at a time when several Ogoni groups are demanding greater inclusion and transparency in the ongoing process. On September 17, protests were reported in parts of Ogoniland, including Korokoro and Bori, with participants demanding greater representation, transparency, equitable development and changes in the leadership of the dialogue process.

Recent community representations have also emphasised that any return to oil production should be accompanied by environmental remediation, community participation, transparency, accountability and tangible economic benefits.

Deezia maintained that Bori State should therefore not be presented as a substitute for environmental justice, responsible resource governance or the completion of remediation efforts.

Rather, he argued, it could serve as an institutional foundation for pursuing those objectives while giving the Ogoni people greater control over their political and developmental priorities.

As discussions over oil resumption continue, the growing emphasis on Bori State adds another dimension to the Ogoni question—one that places political restructuring, institutional representation and long-term development alongside environmental restoration and resource governance.

For the author, the central issue is no longer simply whether oil should return to Ogoniland, but what political and institutional framework will enable the Ogoni people to negotiate their future from a stronger and more sustainable position.