*HON. MICHAEL INALEGWU RESPONDS TO ALLEGATIONS FROM COMR OCHOKWUNU, CALLS OUT “IGNORANCE” AND “STUPIDITY” IN CRISIS BLAME*
In a sharp rebuttal to Comr Ochokwunu Daniel Edor’s recent allegations, Hon. Michael Umoru Inalegwu took to all Agatu WhatsApp groups he is a member and have defended himself against claims of being accountable for the OLOGBA and EGBA crisis in Agatu, Benue State. Inalegwu, who served as chairman from 1999 to May 29, 2002, dismissed the accusations as stemming from “ignorance of the issue and stupidity,” emphasizing that the escalation of the crisis in 2008 occurred under the administration of Otukwula Lawrence, long after his tenure.
In a statement, Inalegwu detailed that the OLOGBA and EGBA conflict dates back to 1972, predating his chairmanship emphasizing that he was still in primary 6. He explained that during his term, the peace and security committee he chaired examined court documents, found both parties had the same court record, and advised them to appeal the Upper Area Court’s Makurdi ruling rather than escalation. “He added that they couldn’t constitute themselves into an appeal court,” he said.
Inalegwu criticized subsequent leaders for setting up an administrative committee in 2008, contrary to his committee’s advice, which he says led to the outbreak of violence. “The bloodshed began when the report of that committee was announced,” he stated, asserting that as an educated individual, he wouldn’t “degrade himself to a judge over an issue decided by the court.”
Inalegwu concluded, “The escalation was not during his time,” and challenged critics to verify records. He signed off with his academic title, Hon. Michael Umoru Inalegwu PhD.
The back-and-forth has intensified calls for transparency in addressing the longstanding Agatu land conflict. Comr Edor’s initial demand for explanations had warned of deeper investigations and possible naming of involved parties. The matter remains a sensitive topic in the community.
there are unresolved concerns! The original court documents submitted were not returned as was alleged. This is a conspiracy and complicity if true.
We demand explanation from Hon Michael Inalegwu on this aligation and how appropriate he examined and found out both paper works were legitimate and given by the same court and under the same jurisdiction. Anything otherwise will proof his incompetencies and attempted bias resolution that have consequently lead to escalation.
If he can’t explain this, then we can say he has conspire against the plaintiff and that, he truly refused to return the original copies as was alleged.
From the evidence, especially that the court had ruled in favor of the plaintiff over the alleged court case of forgery by the defendant, I can accept that it was truly forged and Michael Inalegwu has shown complicity.
For transparency and peace, the original copies should be returned and a clear explanation provided.
Justice, fairness and peace is all we are demanding.