The state’s capital, “Port Harcourt” has been on a hot spot of debate as to if the name is still worth bearing, as it was named in 1913 after Lewis Vernon Harcourt, a British colonial secretary.
Should Rivers State’s capital currently accept a name that reminds us of an era of the colonial masters? Should it be renamed after something or someone that reflects the culture and heritage of the oil rich city? What should the city be renamed to?
Veteran Nigerian journalist and public commentator Donu Kogbara has reignited conversation around the identity of Port Harcourt after making a fresh case for the renaming of the Rivers State capital.
Kogbara, a Port Harcourt-born journalist whose career has spanned more than four decades and major media organisations including the BBC World Service, Sunday Times and Vanguard, revisited the issue in a September 25, 2026 column published by Vanguard.
In the piece titled “The Case for Renaming My State Capital,” Kogbara questioned why Port Harcourt should continue bearing the name of Lewis Vernon Harcourt, the British colonial secretary after whom the city was named in 1913.
Her argument centres on the colonial origin of the name and the historical record surrounding Harcourt. Kogbara noted that Harcourt never visited Nigeria, while the decision to name the port after him was made during the colonial period.
She also pointed to an existing disagreement over what the city should be called if the colonial name is removed. Names including Iguocha and Diobu have featured in historical and contemporary discussions, with different communities advancing competing claims.
According to Kogbara, the disagreement over a replacement name should not necessarily prevent Nigerians from deciding whether the existing colonial name should remain.
She referenced the campaign of Kio Amachree, who has repeatedly called for the removal of Harcourt’s name from Rivers State’s capital. Kogbara argued that the two questions could be treated separately: whether the current name should remain, and what name should replace it.
The veteran journalist also connected the Port Harcourt debate to a wider African question about colonial names and identities, arguing that disagreements among local groups can sometimes leave colonial-era names in place simply because no alternative commands consensus.
Her position adds another prominent voice to an issue that has periodically resurfaced around Port Harcourt’s history and identity.
For a city with a complicated colonial history and diverse cultural identities, the question is no longer simply about what Port Harcourt has been called for more than a century, but also about how its historical identity should be represented today.
