The leaders of eight host communities of where Chevron Nigeria Limited carries out its exploration activities in Southern Ijaw and Brass local government areas under the KEFFES Rural Development Foundation have suspended six persons allegedly involved in the lingering crisis within the organisation, accusing them of wrongful interpretation of the order from the State High Court and attempt to change leadership through the back door.
KEFESS represents the Koluama 1 & 2, Ezetu 1 & 2, Foropa, Fish Town, Ekeni and Sangana located along the Atlantic coastline within Bayelsa State.
Comrade Tibiebi Woinemi Amadein had in a suit a suit against the chairmanship position of Mathew Selepri at the state high court, Oporoma division and the court ordered that the Keffes Rural Development Foundation (KRDF) conduct another election and a stay of execution motion was filed before Court of Appeal sitting in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.
LEADERSHIP gathered that the High Court in its ruling did not declare the claimant, Tibiebi Woinemi Amadein, as chairman or executive of the KRDF. And allegedly in defiance to the ruling of the court had written a letter to Chevron Oil limited claiming victory and setting up a parallel executive of the foundation.
But the members of the Foundation, after an emergency meeting in Yenagoa on Saturday, said the action of Messrs Tibiebi Woinemi Amadein, Kofa Murphy Daniel, Noel Ikonikomo, Christopher longlife, Mrs Amina James and Ebitare Joseph consisted of gross misconduct and acted on impunity which has caused serious disaffection and negative publicity on the body. They accordingly suspended their membership of the KEFFES Foundation without benefit indefinitely.
The emergency meeting, which had in attendance, 26 out of the 32 members of keffes RDF and presided over by the chairman, Sele-epri Matthew, deliberated on the legal leadership of KEFFES, the implication of the judgement and the action of the Tibi-ebi led the group.
At the end of the meeting, the members of the foundation resolved unanimously that the court judgement on the suit filed by the claimant was clear and specific to the office of the chairman, “that the judgment is a decision of the first court of instance which is subject to an appeal and therefore cannot be enforced since the defendant has already filed an appeal and a stay of execution of the judgment of the lower court.”