Recently, the leadership of the Traditional Institution and Ishi Ubomiri Town Union issued an order dated 19th January and published in National Beam online newspaper and Daily Horn, demanding that Mrs. Ogechi Henrietta Amuchienwa desist from desecrating the Traditional Stool of Ishi Ubomiri and throwing the community into bad light before the world. They alleged that serious publications had been made by Mrs. Ogechi Henrietta, including one she sponsored, without pointing to any example where and when it was made.
From paragraph one, they mischievously turned the voice of an oppressed woman crying out for justice and misrepresented it as the voice of one who went all out to throw caution to the wind in desecrating the traditional stool of Ishi Ubomiri and painting the town in bad light. It is baffling how a town union and traditional institution alleged without evidence or stating the conventional medium used in painting them in bad light, was it CNN, BBC, Sun Newspaper, Horn Newspaper, Sahara Reporters, Daily Post, Premium Times, Channels TV, or Arise TV?
After perusing the order, I first questioned the mental soundness of the authors because it appears infantile and incomplete, works that emanate from incompetent hands. As they failed to provide evidence of how she sponsored the publication, it makes the whole thing hearsay or "akuko mama ngozi na Ndi yard". Only illiterates allege without proof; no sound, educated personality, organization, or association with credible leadership alleges without indisputable evidence.
In paragraphs two and three, it is stated that the only sin Eze George Ekeh committed was bringing together the wives of late Chief Ifeanyichukwu Donatus Amuchienwa, his children, and his blood brothers to ensure they were all accommodated in the burial plans of the deceased. From these two paragraphs, it is obvious Eze made a case for them. If Eze should tell the gospel truth, did he address it fairly, in line with principles of peace and conflict resolution? A view of the actions and inactions of the monarch as seen in the piece places a big question mark on him, his capacity, and sincerity.
He failed in his attempt to ensure all were accommodated; he also failed by allowing them to come up with frame-up charges after their plans to be accommodated did not see the light of the day. It further exposes his ability to promote peace and unity in the community. The authors of the piece and those who signed it are regarded as well-informed personalities who are supposed to speak from a point of accuracy of information; unfortunately, they spoke from a point of deformation and misinformation.
Why did they pretend about some reports in the public domain? In their publication, the monarch stated that the deceased married three wives. If I may ask, who told him the deceased married three wives? Is he not aware of reports in the public domain that one of the wives was reportedly divorced and traditional drink on her head was reportedly returned to her kinsmen for alleged infidelity? Is he also not aware of reports in the public domain that the same divorced wife has her nude picture in the public space? What's her nude picture doing in the public domain if she was still married to Dee Dona when he was alive? Who stripped her naked and for what purpose?
Is he also aware of reports about a video the deceased made while alive, where he disowned one of the so-called wives in the presence of his lawyer? Did Eze think that a personality like Late Chief Ifeanyichukwu Donatus Amuchienwa would like to have a woman with her nude picture in the public domain as his wife? Is it not an abomination for an Eze to make a case for such a person?
As the Traditional Ruler, is he not aware that the burial date and process of a family member lie with the most senior son of the deceased and the eldest man in the compound or family head? In their published order, there was nowhere they mentioned that the first son of late Chief Ifeanyichukwu Donatus Amuchienwa, Mr. Aboyemi, and Amuchienwa Family Head, Pastor Goddy Amuchienwa, were fully recognized as those with the onus to fix the burial date and champion the burial.
Let's take note of this glaring fact; at the initial stage, it was a move by the monarch to ensure they were accommodated. At that initial stage, there was no allegation that Late Chief Donatus Ifeanyichukwu Amuchienwa died as a result of a stab wound as alleged by those who are calling for an autopsy. If there were allegations from the initial stage when they sought to be accommodated, why did Eze and those he made a case for keep mute over it and focus on accommodating all family members?
Will it be wrong to insinuate that they resorted to the allegations of stabbing, calling for an autopsy, when they observed that their request to be accommodated in the burial had become glaringly unsuccessful? If they knew there was any offense or case of stabbing, why did they initially ignore it and seek to be accommodated in the burial plans? Who is deceiving whom?
Let me still repeat for emphasis' sake, is Eze not aware that one of the wives was divorced by Dee Donatus Ifeanyichukwu Amuchienwa while alive, and there is a video to that effect in the presence of his lawyer? Is he not aware that the said divorced wife has not lived with him for over 30 years? Can he say there was a marriage with a woman who has not lived with a man for over 30 years and never visited him while on sick bed?
From paragraph five, the piece stated that one of the wives of the deceased went to Court demanding a change in date, autopsy, and post-mortem, but there was nothing like such demand ab initio. She knows she has no locus for such a request because she is not the first wife, and her son is not the most senior son of the deceased.
In the same paragraph five, they indirectly indicted the monarch, stating: "our king was not a party to the suit, the order issued by the acting Chief Judge was not served on our King, and our king was never part of the exhumation process". The best way to describe this statement is the voice of Jacob and the body of Esau. Yes, the piece exonerated His Royal Highness from the suit, the order, and the exhumation process, but it is at the surface level.
Please, His Royal Highness, clear allegations in the public domain that you suspended Umuawam Village Chairman because he attended the burial of Late Chief Ifeanyichukwu Donatus Amuchienwa, who hails from the same village as him, and before you suspended him, you dropped a hint that a Court Order is ready for exhumation of the deceased. This happened about two to three weeks before the court order was issued? Let him deny this if he is not playing hide and seek.
There's a deep meaning in paragraph four; it indirectly means that the head of the Traditional Stool and Town Union are indirectly telling the world that the burial date became illegal immediately those they made a case to be accommodated felt they were not considered. Is it not an indictment?
The million-dollar question is this: why would Eze see a negative change in views and requests from the same people seeking to be accommodated, their questionable move to the police, particularly when they framed them up at Tiger Base and court and decided to keep mute?! He never summoned the courage to say no to frivolous allegations that were never raised by any one of them from the onset when they came to him to ensure they were carried along in burial plans.
If they had been carried along ab initio as requested, would there be a need for an autopsy? The answer is capital NO. If I may ask HRH Eze George Ekeh, if he rejected a wife while alive, and she never identified with him when he was alive, even on his sick bed, will he allow her to identify with him in death? Maybe the same so-called wife belongs to the category of people the deceased warned should not see his corpse whenever he dies.
It is worthy to note that Eze Ekeh and the Town Union failed to tell the world how many of these wives visited the deceased on his sick bed or took care of him all the years he battled with kidney problems. Can Eze swear by the grave of his ancestors or the gods of Ishi Ubomiri that his deliberations on this matter were sincere, free, fair, and in line with principles of equity, justice, and fairness?
When His Royal Highness noticed that the same people he pleaded to be carried along in the burial plans have suddenly surfaced with framed-up allegations of charges of stabbing the same man they pleaded to be included in his burial plans, what did he do against their mischievous motive?
On claims that she has continuously maligned the Traditional Stool of Ubomiri, it is total fallacy. Every publication made on Eze, particularly by dailynewsalert, the online newspaper that exhumed this story before others followed up, he was contacted in line with ethical journalism for a balanced report. Instead of positively replying, he chose the path of intimidation and threat of legal action. Can Eze deny that these?
The claims that she has continuously maligned the Traditional Stool of Ubomiri are total fallacy. Every publication made on Eze, particularly by dailynewsalert, the online newspaper that exhumed this story, was contacted in line with ethical journalism for a balanced report. Instead of responding positively, Eze chose the path of intimidation and threat of legal action.
In one instance, he was given all the news reports before publication, but he declined to state his side of the story. How can Eze claim cyber-bullying in a report that was sent to him? A voice note was also sent to him, and he declined, responding with a threat of legal action instead.
Can Eze deny that the same people seeking accommodation didn't approach him to support their frame-up allegations, demanding an autopsy and post-mortem? The demands are filled with desperation to silence justice with intimidation and conspiracy. The writing on the wall is clear.
I commend the Traditional Institution and Town Union of Ishi Ubomiri for exposing themselves through lies, lacuna, and indirectly indicting themselves in the order filled with akuko mama Ngozi and Ndi yard. Indeed, we can hear the voice of Jacob and the body of Esau