Reps Probe Alleged Land Grabbing, Intimidation Of Villagers In Imo

The House of Representatives has ordered a stop to construction and other development activities on a disputed parcel of land in Imo State following allegations of illegal acquisition, threats against residents and the use of armed men to intimidate villagers.

The House Committee on Public Petitions also directed that armed men allegedly operating in Umundoche community, Ngor Okpala Local Government Area of the state, be disarmed pending the resolution of the dispute.

Naija News reports that the orders were issued on Wednesday during a hearing on Petition No. 901 of 2026, filed by J.U. Okoye Chambers against Prince Charles Amadi, popularly known as Chavon; Chikadibia Anyanwu; and Chidubem Nwosu.

The petition alleges that more than 2,500 hectares of land were illegally acquired and accuses the respondents of shooting at villagers, attempted murder, invading the community with armed men, desecrating a corpse, abusing police powers and violating a memorandum of understanding.

The traditional ruler of Nma 1 of Obioma Autonomous Community in Ngor Okpala, HRH Eze Lambert Unuoha, was also named as a respondent.

The committee chairman, represented by his deputy, Rep. Matthew Nwogu, directed all parties to suspend activities on the disputed land until the matter was resolved through the committee or other appropriate channels.

He specifically warned against the use of heavy equipment, including bulldozers and caterpillars, on the property.

“There are orders that no more actions on this land until this matter is resolved,” the chairman said.

“Either through this place, or through which other means you want to resolve it. That’s the first order. No more putting up caterpillars or bulldozers in that land.”

The chairman said the committee had contacted the Department of State Services (DSS) and the police over allegations that armed men were operating in the community.

According to him, both security agencies denied supplying firearms to the individuals in question.

“All the boys that are armed in that village should be disarmed. Because we have made contact with the DSS. They said they didn’t give them the gun. The police said they didn’t,” he said.

He explained that the directives were intended to prevent further tension while the committee investigated the allegations.

The hearing also featured disagreements between lawyers representing the parties over a pending court case and whether it should affect the committee’s consideration of the petition.

Counsel to Charles Farms Limited, identified during the proceedings as one of the parties involved in the dispute, maintained that his clients had legally acquired the land and paid the relevant parties.

He rejected the allegations against his clients and disclosed that they had instituted court proceedings against the petitioners.

The lawyer said he had written to the committee on September 28, 2026, explaining his clients’ position and providing details of the ongoing court case.

However, he admitted that he did not bring the supporting court documents to the hearing.

The committee chairman rejected the explanation as insufficient, insisting that the lawyer must provide certified documentary evidence to establish the status and scope of the case.

The lawyer subsequently promised to organise the documents in his possession, certify the relevant papers and submit them to the committee.

A member of the committee cautioned against allowing the existence of a court case to automatically stop the legislative investigation.

He explained that the committee had a constitutional responsibility to consider petitions submitted to the National Assembly and would need to examine the court documents before deciding whether the case covered all the issues raised by the petitioners.

“That a matter is in court does not immediately stop us from doing our duty. This is a constitutional committee. One of the very few committees written into the Nigerian constitution,” the lawmaker said.

He urged the parties to respect the legislative process and allow the petitioners to present their complaints.

“Tomorrow he might be the one petitioning this National Assembly over an issue. So let us respect processes, respect our constitution. And then respect the will of the people who have come here to seek justice,” he added.

The lawmaker also called for fairness, urging the committee to give the respondents sufficient time to prepare formal replies and submit documents supporting their positions.

Counsel to the petitioners, Dr Julius Onyemi, told the committee that efforts had been made to settle the dispute before it was brought before the House.

He said the first petition was submitted on July 17, 2026, followed by another on August 14 and a further petition later that month.

According to Onyemi, he made several attempts to contact the respondents to find a solution with the community, but the efforts were unsuccessful.

He alleged that the respondents initiated the court action after the petitions had been submitted to the House, suggesting that the move was intended to frustrate the committee’s proceedings.

The lawyer further accused the respondents of using security personnel and armed men to threaten residents and prevent them from accessing their community.

He urged the lawmakers to take steps to stop the alleged intimidation while the investigation continued.

Onyemi also questioned the process through which the land was acquired, calling on the parties to demonstrate that they had followed the applicable customary land acquisition procedures.

He raised concerns about the environmental impact of the proposed development, asking whether an environmental impact assessment had been conducted and made available to the community.

The lawyer argued that residents should be consulted on development activities that could affect their land and environment.

However, representatives of the respondents rejected the allegations and maintained that the land was legally acquired.

The claims remain under investigation by the committee.

The lawmakers also sought evidence to establish what happened during the alleged incidents in the community.

During the hearing, a representative of one of the respondents challenged claims that armed men had visited the area and threatened residents.

He said he had been in the area since Monday and disputed claims that he was present at the location where the alleged incident occurred.

The representative offered to provide his flight itinerary and hotel booking details to support his account.

In response, the committee chairman asked the parties to submit any available video recordings or photographs that could help establish the facts.

He said the committee wanted to examine available evidence rather than rely solely on conflicting accounts presented during the hearing.

The chairman restated the directives suspending further development on the disputed land and calling for the disarming of men allegedly involved in intimidating residents.

The committee adjourned the matter until November 2026 to allow the respondents to study the petition, prepare their formal responses and submit the required documents. No final findings have been made by the committee. While the petitioners accuse the respondents of illegal land acquisition and intimidation, the respondents maintain that the land was legally acquired.