Who Failed To Secure The Asaba Rally? NDC Counters Police Claims With Written Request
THE controversy surrounding the 7th November political violence in Asaba has taken a new turn, with the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) accusing the police of failing to provide security for its supporters despite an earlier request.
Supporters of the party’s presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Obi, popularly known as Obidients, said they formally notified security authorities about the planned procession and requested police protection.
As evidence, the organisers presented a letter dated 2 October 2026, addressed to the Delta State Commissioner of Police and the Department of State Services.
The correspondence, titled Obidient and OK Rally for Mr. Peter Obi, carried the signatures of Chris O.O. Biose, also known as Obidient Daddy, Chief Solomon Akeni and Dr. C. Chinye Okobah.
The three officials signed on behalf of the Delta Obidient Elders’ Council, serving respectively as chairman, secretary and legal adviser.
In the letter, the organisers described the proposed programme as a peaceful event involving a march, singing, dancing and speeches.
They also expressly requested police protection, saying the correspondence was intended to notify the authorities about the event and secure their assistance.
Consequently, a source associated with the organisers questioned the police decision to blame them for the subsequent violence. The source argued that providing security for citizens was a constitutional responsibility of the police and that the organisers had taken steps to obtain protection.
The accusation directly challenges the explanation earlier provided by the Delta State Police Command.
Speaking through its spokesperson, SP Bright Edafe, the Command said it received intelligence indicating a likelihood of violence before the procession.
Edafe explained that the police invited the organisers to a security meeting and briefed them on the threats identified by the authorities.
He added that officers advised the organisers against conducting an open-road procession. Instead, they recommended a designated venue where security personnel could provide appropriate protection.
Nevertheless, the police alleged that the organisers ignored the advice and went ahead with the street procession.
The newly presented letter has therefore brought the question of prior security arrangements into sharper focus. Although the police insist that the organisers disregarded their recommendations, the NDC supporters maintain that they had already informed the authorities and requested protection.
The dispute now raises important questions about communication between political organisers and security agencies, the handling of security requests and the responsibilities of both parties when public demonstrations take place.
Ultimately, an independent examination of the 2nd October correspondence, the police response, the security meeting and the decisions taken before the procession could help establish whether the authorities and organisers fulfilled their respective responsibilities.
