In every community, leadership is sustained not merely by authority, but by legitimacy. The moral force that binds leaders and the led is the collective belief that power flows from the will of the people and is exercised within the boundaries of agreed rules. When that delicate balance is violated, leadership risks losing the very foundation upon which it stands. Such is the troubling narrative currently unfolding within the Odidi Federated Community under the chairmanship of Prince Preye Okrikpa.

Recent events surrounding what has been described by many community members as a “congress” have raised serious concerns about transparency, inclusiveness, and respect for democratic and Traditional norms. Rather than serving as a platform for open deliberation and collective decision-making, the gathering has increasingly been portrayed as a hurried and tightly controlled exercise—one whose outcome appeared predetermined long before the meeting convened.

Within community governance, a congress is meant to be the highest forum of the people. It is where voices converge, disagreements are heard, and consensus is forged through dialogue. But when such a forum becomes an instrument for validating prearranged outcomes, it risks degenerating into what observers have termed a Kangaroo Congress—a procedural spectacle designed more to legitimize a decision than to debate it.

At the heart of the controversy lies the question of tenure elongation. Reports circulating within the community suggest that the congress was convened under circumstances that many residents view as irregular, with limited consultation and minimal transparency regarding its agenda. For critics, the timing and manner of the gathering signal a desperation for tenure elongation by the current leadership rather than to strengthen the institutional structures of the community.

Tenure elongation, when pursued without broad consensus, often erodes the very trust that leadership depends upon. It sends a signal that the rules binding the community are flexible when they stand in the way of personal ambition. History has repeatedly shown that attempts to stretch mandates beyond their natural limits rarely strengthen authority; instead, they provoke deeper questions about accountability and fairness.

In the case of the Odidi Federated Community, the stakes are not merely procedural. The integrity of communal governance—carefully built over generations through traditions of consultation and collective responsibility—hangs in the balance. When Congress is stage-managed, it ceases to function as democratic forum and begins to resemble instrument of consolidation rather than participation.

Many Odidi community Elders and  stakeholders have therefore rejected Kangaroo Congress and called for a return to transparency and adherence to established norms.

Their argument is simple yet profound: leadership must derive its strength from the people, not from procedural shortcuts. A genuine congress should invite scrutiny, encourage debate, and allow dissenting voices to be heard without intimidation or marginalization.

In light of the growing tension and dissatisfaction among members of the Odidi Federated community, there is an urgent need for the immediate intervention of relevant government and security agencies.

Authorities must carefully examine the circumstances surrounding the controversial congress and ensure that due process, fairness, and the rule of law prevail. Proactive engagement by appropriate institutions is essential to prevent the situation from escalating into unrest or a breakdown of law and order.

Early intervention will not only safeguard peace but also reaffirm the principle that communal governance must operate within the framework of transparency, accountability, and respect for established procedures.

The controversy surrounding Prince Preye Okrikpa’s leadership and the purported tenure elongation attempt ultimately raises a broader question for the Odidi Federated Community: "What kind of governance does the community wish to uphold? One that thrives on openness, accountability, and periodic renewal of leadership—or one that allows power to stretch itself beyond the limits originally set by the people?"

Communities flourish when institutions are stronger than individuals. They endure when leaders recognize that authority is temporary but legitimacy is permanent. If the Odidi Federated Community is to preserve the unity and dignity that define it, the congress must remain genuine expressions of the people’s will rather than hurried and premeditated ceremonies designed to extend a mandate.

This is purely a charade and shameful for an executive member to pronounce tenure elongation for himself and by himself with collections of signatures.

For in the end, a congress that silences voices may succeed in the short term—but it risks leaving behind a legacy of distrust that no tenure extension can repair.

The Odidi Federated Community with consistent tenure elongation desperation have long established a single tenure of four without any time extension which the prince Preye Okrikpa led administration is a beneficiary. The most worrisome question of this  administration that has spent approximately four years and tenure expires on the 28th April 2026, is: WHY WAS THE CONSTITUTION NOT WRITTEN FOUR THE PAST YEARS OF THE ADMINISTRATION?

This administration has not called a general meeting four years and has governed with impunity, No accountability, No projects,  using personal accounts to receive funds and spending recklessly against community norms, suddenly called kangaroo Congress adopted tenure elongation and written of constitution for the basis. This is shameful and totally unacceptable.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Amb. Truston Gesikeme Gbenekama, a Doctoral Fellow Institute of Global Peace and Conflict Management (DrFigpcm) and PhD in view, Delta State University Abraka, writes from Odidi Kalama

#penglobaldiscourse #leadership #Odidi #Delta