With the limitation period for the presentation of petitions flowing from the just concluded Presidential and National Assembly elections having closed a fortnight ago, and those of gubernatorial and Houses of Assembly elections closing on the 1st of April, 2019 save for states and local constituencies where supplementary elections were held on the 23rd of March, 2019, it is safe to conclude that the politicians have had their day under the proverbial sun, and have now passed the ball into the court of the judiciary who must now get to work in the next one year at least to determine the catalogue of petitions that have proceeded  from the womb of the 2019 elections which in many ways brought to full glare and national embarrassment, the weakness of our electoral process. So bad was it, that some segment of the civil society posit that it is arguably the worst election to have been conducted in Nigeria since the dawn of uninterrupted democracy in 1999.

Contrary to the situation in 2015, the victory of president Muhammadu Buhari is today a subject of litigation. Whereas former president Goodluck Jonathan made the now famous phone call to his opponent candidate Muhammadu Buhari when it became crystal clear that he was on the wrong side of the ballot, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar rightly or wrongly depending on the individual’s political bias, has decided to challenge the re-election of Muhammadu Buhari in court.

In a 147-page petition filed on his behalf by a battery of very senior and distinguished members of the bar, Atiku and his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), are asking that the result of the election as announced by the electoral umpire, INEC be nullified, and their candidate returned. According to them from what one gathers from the well laid out petition, on a proper computation of results from the polling units, it was the PDP and their candidate Atiku Abubakar, and not Muhammadu Buhari who won the election. They have made a heavy weather of having evidences which support this proposition particularly the smart card reader data from all the polling units across the country transmitted to INEC’s back-end server during the course of the polls. 

Beyond Atiku’s petition, a staggering  736 petitions challenging one election or the other, have been received by the election petition tribunals inaugurated by the acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Tanko Muhammad, two weeks before the conduct of the election. This number understandably could increase as the final collation of results by INEC in Rivers state last week, has seen some candidates and their political parties angling to challenge the return of incumbent Governor Nyesom Wike.

The climate of rigging and manipulation of election results in Nigeria added to the undue militarization of the electoral process by the incumbents who are often in control of the security apparatus often necessitates the challenge of  elections by Petitioners on a number of grounds that have been laid down by the electoral law namely, that the person whose election is being challenged was not qualified to contest the election ab initio; or that the winner of the election did not score the majority of lawful votes cast at the election. Others are that the questioned election is invalid by reason of corrupt practices or non-compliance with the provisions of the Act; or that the Petitioner was validly nominated but was unlawfully excluded from contesting in the election by the electoral umpire. See section 138(1) )(a-d) of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended).

It is however not in the fleshing out of the grounds of the petition and the particulars in support of same that the Petitioners often run into a problem but in the leading of evidence to establish to the required degree of proof, the often serious allegations contained in most petitions such that could eventuate into a return of the petitioner by the tribunal as was recently seen in the Osun state election petition tribunal which nullified the victory of incumbent governor Gboyega Oyetola in favour of Senator Ademola Adeleke. This writer however understands that decision is a subject of appeal at the Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja.

A holistic appraisal of the election petitions that have made their way to our courts and/or election tribunals as far back as the cases of Omoboriowo v Ajasin (1984) 1 SCNLR 108; Obih v Mbakwe (1984) LPELR-2712 (SC); Nwobodo v Onoh (1984) 1 SC 1; Buhari v INEC (2008) 19 NWLR (pt. 1120); Ojukwu v Obasanjo (2006) (EPR) 242 to name a few, will readily reveal the near impossibility of upturning an election through the courts. A petitioner almost always finds himself contending with a large body of case law and statutory provisions that literally excuses and/or explains away the electoral infractions complained of in his petition. Save for a handful of cases where a petitioner was returned through the tribunals, thousands of petitions go to court at every election cycle without any success. Perhaps the circumstances of the 2007 general election puts the difficulties faced by a petitioner in proper context. Despite the winner of that very controversial election acknowledging that the process which brought him to power was fraught with widespread irregularities and gross manipulation of the electoral process, it is ironical to say the least, that the challenge of that election at the presidential election tribunal by then General Muhammadu Buhari came to nought. Such is the lot of the Petitioner.

The sad consequence(s) of this is that it has helped to fester the culture of rigging across board. The Nigerian politician having understood how difficult it is to upturn an election through the courts, has devised even more brazen and disingenuous means of rigging him or herself into power and thereafter, dare their opponent to go to court to challenge the victory. Anyone who has had the privilege of studying the electoral forms from our shambolic elections will readily come to terms with the fact that elections in Nigeria are basically a riggers affair. It is the candidate who is able to out-rig the other through any means whatsoever that is often declared the winner thus making a mockery of our democracy.

In a bold attempt however to improve the sanctity and integrity of our electoral process and to the credit of former chairman of the electoral commission Alhaji Attahiru Jega, the smart card reader was introduced in the 2015 general election to checkmate the recurrent problem of multiple accreditation of voters against the spirit of the voters register. The genus of the smart card reader machine was to ensure that only bio-metrically accredited voters could cast valid ballots at the polling booths. It was thought that it would solve the recurrent problem of multiple thumbprinting by unscrupulous elements who lend themselves to politicians who prostitute the electoral process.

But the legality of the smart card reader as an instrument for the conduct of elections was to evolve into a serious constitutional debate on the back of the petitions that made it to the election tribunals following that round of elections. In the case of Nyesom v Peterside (2014) 5 NWLR (pt. 1430) 377 a full-bench of the apex Court despite acknowledging the motive behind the introduction and use of the card reader machine in an election, which needless to say was to bolster the democratic norm of  “one man one vote”, went ahead to strike it down for having derived its efficacy from the INEC guidelines which obviously was in conflict with section 49(2) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) which nominates the voters register as the instrument of accreditation of voters and proof of over-voting by a person challenging an election.

In answering the question whether failure to use card reader for accreditation of voters can invalidate an election, the apex Court Per. AKA’AHS held instructively as follows, “the introduction of the card reader is certainly a welcome development in the electoral process. Although it is meant to improve on the integrity of those accredited to vote so as to check the incidence of rigging, it is yet to be made part of the Electoral Act. Section 138(2) envisages a situation where the Electoral Commission issues instruction or guidelines which are not carried out. The failure of the card  reader machine, or failure to use it for the accreditation of voters cannot invalidate an election. The section provides as follows: “138(2) an act or omission which may be contrary to an instruction or directive of the Commission or of an officer appointed for the purpose of election but which is not contrary to the provisions of this Act shall not of itself be a ground for questioning the election”. 

With the above sentiments of the apex Court, many of the petitioners who went to court in the last cycle of election hoping to make a case out of the non-use of the smart card readers in the accreditation of voters at the polling units found themselves on the wrong side of the law, and severally paid with a dismissal of their petitions. Unfortunately, none of the petitioners drew the attention of the apex Court to the amendment of section 49 (2) of the Electoral Act which was signed into law by former president Goodluck Jonathan on the 20th of March, 2015, just 8 days before the holding of the general election. On their part too, the judex did not take judicial notice of this amendment to the principal Act which legitimized the use of the smart card reader for voter accreditation; the very basis upon which the Court upheld all the disputed governorship elections conducted by the INEC on April 11, 2015. 

Having said that, the 2019 elections and the petitions trailing it, provides another window of judicial activism for the judiciary which has the potency of revolutionizing our electoral process and by extension, our nascent democracy. With the countrywide criticisms that have greeted the conduct of the just concluded general elections ranging from selective use of the smart card reader machines in some places and the outright thumbprinting of ballot papers in the quarters of party chieftains and what not, in a barefaced prostitution of our electoral process, suffice it to say that the ball is effectively in the Court of the judiciary to rise up to the occasion in ensuring that not a single illegal vote counts in the return of a candidate. 

A simple way to do this, is to ensure the fulsome recognition of the data from the smart card reader machines and using same as a benchmark for reconciling the total votes cast in a polling unit so as to check against over-voting which was perpetrated by politicians with reckless abandon in the just concluded 2019 elections. In places where the smart card reader machines malfunctioned and thus were not used, the tribunals must ensure that the procedure enumerated by the electoral umpire on how voters in such polling units should cast their votes, was applied to the latter. Anything otherwise, must of necessity lead to the cancellation of the results from such unit as consecrated by the relevant provision of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended), and the Guidelines of the electoral commission 2019. 

Instructively, the apex Court in the Nyesom v Peterside case (supra) acknowledges that the innovation of the smart card reader machines was well intentioned in that, it was calculated to improve the integrity of our elections. The petitions that are now lying before the several election petition tribunals across the country, provides an opportunity for the judex to uphold  the smart card reader machine and lend it the much needed judicial imprimatur which counted against its usage in the last cycle of elections, irrespective of the consequences for the individual poll where it is applied.

At a time when it has been shown that the executive and the legislature are enmeshed in a dark conspiracy to the detriment of our democracy, such as was seen in the circumstances under which assent to the Electoral Act Amendment Bill (2018) was refused by president Muhammadu Buhari, the judiciary can step in, in its hallowed capacity as the avowed defender of any democracy to sanitize our electoral system.  This is what Nigerians who are increasingly losing confidence in our electoral process earnestly asks of the judiciary.

Raymond Nkannebe; a legal practitioner writes from Lagos.

Major decisions that affect
the welfare of lawyers are usually decided by the National Executive Committee
of the Nigerian Bar Association. Though this decisions affect lawyers directly,
quite a number of lawyers are unaware of how decisions are reached by the NBA’s
National Executive Council, while some believe all decisions are made by the
NBA President, more seasoned members of the Bar understand that such decisions
are reached by following due process and the principles of equity.

In order to ensure fairness,
equity and proper administration, the NEC represents all Stakeholders in the Nigerian
Legal Profession. According  to the NBA
Constitution, the NBA NEC is made of the following members;

(a) National Officers;

(b) All past Presidents and
General Secretaries;

(c) All Chairmen and
Secretaries of registered Branches;

(d) One (1) other representative
of each registered Branch;

(e) Chairmen and Secretaries
of Sections;

(f) Other deserving members
of the Association co-opted by the National Executive Committee provided always
that the total number shall not exceed 180 members.

Furthermore, Section 7(6) of
the NBA Constitution provides expressly for how decisions are to be made and it
states clearly that, “consensus shall be the aim of the National Executive
Committee but if it becomes necessary to put any questions to vote, then it
shall be decided by a simple majority, based on a show of hands, provided
however that the National Executive Committee may resolve to decide any
specific issue by secret ballot”.

Recently, the decision of
the NEC removing Mr. Akinlade, the Chairman of the NBA Ikorodu Branch, received
some criticisms by members of the Bar who believed the NBA President, Mr. Paul
Usoro, reached the decision. A position solely, which could not be farther from
the truth.  Mr. Bayo Akinlade, was
suspended as the Chairman of the NBA Ikorodu Branch over what the NEC termed
“gross disrespect and disregard for the bar”.

As evidenced above in the
NBA Constitution, there is a process for reaching decisions at the NEC and same
was duly observed and followed by the Paul Usoro SAN led NBA in the removal of
the NBA Chairman. It is noted that the NBA President has introduced groundbreaking
initiatives into the NBA, especially initiatives bothering on transparency,
good governance and credible leadership. Most definitely the Nation can learn a
lot from the Nigerian Bar Association.

At the last meeting of the
NEC held on the 28^th of March, 2019, other issues discussed include
the Rule of Law, the 2019 Election Monitoring reports, illegal harassment of
members of the Bar and the Financial Audit of the NBA among other things.

The NBA President, Paul Usoro SAN continues to be a shinning example on leadership within the Bar. To stay updated on the
amazing work of the NBA and its president, follow the NBA President
@paulusorosan on all your social media platforms or stay tuned to the Legalnaija
Blawg.

@Legalnaija

Employers quite frequently do seek legal advice on their obligation to give work/employment reference to their employees. While there is no general legal duty to give an employee (or former employee) any reference – positive or negative, recent case law suggests that there is an implied term in contracts of employment imposing a duty on the employer to provide fair and accurate work/employment reference for their employees. There is a potential liability for an employer who provides unfair or misleading reference, which can cause harm to the employee. 

In the case of Kelvin Nwaigwe v. Fidelity Bank Plc (unreported Suit No. NICN/LA/85/2014) the National Industrial Court examined the implied obligation of an employer to give work reference. The Claimant sued his former employer claiming inter alia, a right to work reference. Due to the paucity of local authorities in this area of labour law, the Court turned to the law and practice in similar jurisdictions such as the UK for guidance, and held thus: 

‘I am persuaded by the force of these UK case law authorities that in appropriate cases there is an implied term in contracts of employment imposing a duty on the employer to provide work reference in respect of its employee, whether former or existing. The defendant in the instant case is a Bank and hence a financial institution. This means that the defendant has an obligation to give a work reference to, or in respect of, the claimant, which work reference must be true, accurate, fair and not misleading to a future employer; and I so find and hold.’

Under common law, there was no absolute obligation on employers to provide reference to an employee but case law in the UK has developed a number of exceptions to the common law position. It would now appear that, in certain circumstances, an employee can require an employer to give a reference. UK case law suggests that it may be appropriate in some cases to imply a term into a contract of employment that the employer will provide the employee with a reference at the request of a prospective employer. The basis for this implied term was aptly stated in the case of Malik v. Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA (BCCI) (1997) UKHL 23 where the House of Lords held that Employers must take care not to damage their employees’ future employment prospects, by harsh and oppressive behaviour or by any other form of conduct which is unacceptable today as falling below the standards set by the implied trust and confidence term. 

For clarity and context, some of the UK case laws that were applied in the Nwaigwe case are examined as follows:

In Spring v. Guardian Assurance (1995) 2 AC 296, the plaintiff was dismissed from office by the defendant (an insurance company and hence a financial institution). He got another job which required a work reference from the defendant. The work reference given by the defendant was not favourable, described by the trial judge, Judge Lever QC, as the “kiss of death”. In consequence, the plaintiff lost the new job and so brought an action against his former employer on several grounds including negligent misstatement, malicious falsehood and breach of contract, but not defamation. An action in defamation (but not for the tort of negligence) would have entitled the defendant to the defence of qualified privilege. The House of Lords held that an employer who gives a reference in respect of a former employee owed that employee a duty to take reasonable care in its preparation and would be liable to him in negligence if he failed to do so and the employee thereby suffered economic damage. The House of Lords also held that an implied term of the contract existed between the plaintiff and the defendant to ensure that reasonable care was taken in the compiling and giving of the work reference, and that the defendant was in breach of that implied term.

Lord Slynn in the House of Lords commented that, even if there is no universal duty on an employer to give a reference, it would seem that contracts may exist when it is necessary to imply such a duty. Lord Woolf (as he then was) then attempted to specify the circumstances which would enable such a term to be implied. Those circumstances are: 

a. the existence of the contract of employment or of services; 

b. the fact that the contract relates to an engagement of a class where it is normal practice to require a reference from a previous employer before employment is offered; and 

c. the fact that the employee cannot be expected to enter into a class of employment, except on the basis that the employer will on the request of another employer, made not less than a reasonable time after the termination of the previous employment, provide a full and frank reference to the employer. 

In another UK case, Bartholomew v. Hackney London Borough and Anor (1999) IRLR246, the Court of Appeal held that in giving a reference to a former employee, a former employer owes a duty of care to the former employee to provide a reference which is true, accurate and fair; fairness determined by having regard to the whole of the reference and the surrounding context, as a number of discrete statements, though factually accurate in themselves, could nevertheless read as a whole give an unfair or potentially unfair impression to a recipient of the reference. However, it is not necessary that a reference in every case be full and comprehensive. 

In TSB Bank Plc v. Harris (2000) IRLR 157, a reference provided to a potential employer for an existing employee which disclosed customer complaints unknown to the employee, was found to be a breach of the employer’s duty and was held to be a breach of trust and confidence to disclose complaints to others, if the employee was not given an opportunity to answer them.

And in Cox & Cross v. Sun Alliance Life Ltd (2001) IRLR 448, the Court of Appeal made it clear that the question of whether an employer who provides a reference for a former employee is in breach of the duty to take reasonable care to ensure that the reference is accurate and fair will usually involve making reasonable inquiry into the factual basis of the statements in the reference. The take away from this case is that it is advisable for employers to confine unfavourable statements on employees to those matters into which they have made reasonable investigation and have reasonable grounds to believe are true; and where an investigation is discontinued, unfavourable comments should be confined to matters that were investigated before the employee’s departure. 

As though taking a cue from other jurisdictions such as the UK, the Courts in Nigeria (as in the in the Uwaigwe), have held that an employer is indeed obligated in law to provide an employee with a reference. An employer owes a duty of care against negligent misstatement i.e. not to mislead or misrepresent to the person (usually a potential employer or the employee) to whom the reference is provided. It is submitted that this approach accords more with best practice in labour and employment law.  

In conclusion, sometimes it is best for employers to adopt the position of just providing a statement of service confirming an employee’s length of service and not commenting further. This is known as the “no comment” reference. The other option is to provide a “full disclosure” reference where the employer provides all the relevant details of the employee, including appraisals and potentials, while leaving it to the potential employer to draw its conclusions. An employer cannot be held liable for defamation in providing this type of reference as long as it is made without malice and the information is based on credible evidence. However, it is safer to provide information based on performance appraisals that were counter-signed by the former employee. This will prevent potential liability for negligent misstatements.

Michael Dugeri

Corporate Commercial Lawyer at Austen-Peters & Co.

Mikedugeri@gmail.com 

As part of its efforts to support capacity building in the legal profession, the Lagos branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in collaboration with the Commercial Legal Department of MTN Nigeria organised a masterclass for lawyers on best corporate legal practices.

MTN Nigeria at its corporate headquarters in Ikoyi, Lagos, hosted the event, which featured a cross-section of senior as well as young lawyers in support of the NBA’s efforts at deepening industry knowledge through the Continuing Legal Education and Mentorship Committee.

Commenting on the masterclass, the company’s Chief Operating Officer, Mazen Mroue stated that the event was yet another testament to MTN’s long term commitment to investing in the country’s human development capacity.

In his remarks, Corporate Relations Executive at MTN Nigeria, Tobechukwu Okigbo said the masterclass “is a strong example of how in-house teams can share best practices with external counsel and we are grateful that we are doing this.”

A foremost corporate lawyer, Ifeoma Utah, who is currently the General Manager, Commercial Legal, MTN Nigeria walked attendees through the rudiments of being a great corporate lawyer. Utilising a variety of in-house case studies and sharing from her wide experience, she expounded on the importance of building critical skill sets in risk management, crisis management, negotiation, matching the right case to the right law firm and being emotionally intelligent.

She also highlighted the increasingly important role of the corporate lawyer as “there is more to being a lawyer than just drafting documents and going to court. You have to be a coach, a financial expert, a business analyst and a star negotiator, among others.”

Tobenna Erojikwe, Chairman of the Continuous Legal Education Committee, Nigerian Bar Association, Lagos Branch and Partner at Law Crest LLP thanked MTN Nigeria for its continued support to the NBA Lagos Branch as the largest corporate supporter of the branch.

INTRODUCTION

It has become rampant
to see legal practitioners tout their perceived success rates with regards to
cases they have handled in courts during press interviews, while discussing
with prospective clients, on law office websites etc.

Some lawyers would
even say they have won a certain number of cases, lost others, and drawn a few;
and at other times display graphical or pictorial representations of their
success rates on law office websites and in other publications. This practice
is even more disturbing because renowned and widely celebrated legal
practitioners are also complicit.

The result is that
impressionable lawyers and especially the young wigs have been left with a
notion of law practice that if not corrected may lead to a complete failure of
the administration of justice in Nigeria. This notion encourages a defence
lawyer to believe that it is only when his client is discharged and acquitted
that he has won the case, or a prosecutor to equate conviction of a defendant
to a successful rendition of his legal service. This notion has led many legal
practitioners to do everything possible, including manufacturing evidence,
encouraging perjury, and commission of crimes, in a bid to ensure they get
judgments favourable to their clients.  

DUTY
OF A LEGAL PRACTITIONER IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

The Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal
Practitioners (RPC), 2007, in expressing the general responsibility of a
lawyer in Rule 1 states that:

A lawyer shall uphold and
observe the rule of law, promote and foster the cause of justice, maintain
a high standard of professional conduct, and shall not engage in any conduct
which is unbecoming of a legal practitioner. (Underlining mine for emphasis)

Every responsible
lawyer admits that obeisance to the rule of law and fostering the cause of
justice is the most fundamental duty of a legal practitioner. In fact the Court
of Appeal put it better in PCN v. Lamlex (Pharmacy) (Nig.) Ltd. &
Ors[i]
when it stated as follows:

I need to reiterate the cardinal
principle that counsel are ministers in the temple of justice and should
therefore ensure that they stay on the side of justice at all times. It is the
duty of counsel to present the case of his client to the best of his ability
but the duty and loyalty of counsel does not extend beyond presenting the
client’s case within the law and rule of professional ethics. Counsel owe a
higher duty to the cause of justice.

It therefore follows
that a legal practitioner in rendering services to a client must ensure that he
is within the bounds of the law at all times.  A lawyer is therefore not permitted, during
representation of a client, to aid or participate in any unlawful conduct, to give
advice which he knows is capable of causing breach of the law, and to conceal
any fact or evidence in proof thereof which he knows will aid the
administration of justice, even if such fact or evidence does not support his
case.[ii]
See Obeten
v. State (2007) ALL FWLR (Pt. 376) 711 and Co-operative and Commerce Bank (Nigeria) PLC. v. Okpala & Anor
(1997) LPELR-6278 (CA).

Where, for example, a
client approaches a lawyer and states that he committed an offence and intends
to plead guilty during his arraignment, such a lawyer if he appreciates the
hallowed duty he has in fostering the cause of justice, knows that his duty in
rendering professional services to such a client does not include prompting the
client to enter a plea of “not guilty”, and conjuring facts or employing delay
tactics to frustrate the administration of justice. Abiru J.C.A. in Salihu v. Gana & Ors[iii]
observed instructively that “lawyers who
misuse their knowledge of the law and legal procedure to stultify the process
of administration of justice are a disappointment and constitute a clog to the
progress of the legal profession.”

In a circumstance
where a court of law convicts a defendant flowing from his plea of “guilty”
during arraignment, and upon being satisfied that such a plea is consistent
with the facts of the case, the lawyer who represented such a defendant cannot properly
be said to have lost the case.

In fact, a lawyer
cannot win or lose a case. How could he when the case in the first place was
never his? The Court of Appeal and Supreme have reiterated time and again that
counsel qua advocate is an expert of the law and the facts of the case belong
solely to his client. See Afribank Nigeria PLC v. Homelux Construction
Company LTD & Anor (2008) LPELR-9020 (CA) and Alhaji Kachalla Musa v. AG Taraba State & Anor (2014) LPELR-24183
(CA).

The RPC also
stipulates that “Where an accused person
discloses facts which clearly and credibly show his guilt, the lawyer shall not
present any evidence inconsistent with those facts and shall not offer any
testimony which he knows to be false”.[iv]

A legal practitioner
has the responsibility, as master of law, to give legal advice to his clients
and strictly apply the law to the facts of a client’s case. In circumstances
where it is apparent to a lawyer that his client’s case is frivolous or that
the chances of his client succeeding are extremely remote, he has a
responsibility of informing the client of the uselessness of pursuing such a
course in other to save his client from unnecessary expenses; and to save the
time of the courts. See MAGIT v. University of Agriculture, Makurdi
& Ors (2005) LPELR-1816 (SC);
Jegede v. Afe & Anor (2017)
LPELR-43232 (CA) and Okeke & Ors v. Okoli & Ors (1999)
LPELR-6638 (CA).

IMPROPER
ATTRACTION OF BUISNESS

A legal practitioner
shall not engage or be involved in any advertising or promotion of his practice
of the law which makes comparison with other lawyers or includes any statement
as to the size of or success of his practice and his success rate.[v]

The practice by some
lawyers in publicly portraying success rates on the basis of the favourability or
otherwise of court judgments in respect of matters they handle for their
clients is a breach of the rules and etiquettes regulating the conduct of legal
practitioners in Nigeria. It cannot be overemphasized that the delicate nature
of law practice is sober and a responsible lawyer must always contemplate the
duties he owes to his clients, colleagues, the court and most importantly- the
cause of justice, in all his professional dealings.

CONCLUSION  

A legal practitioner
is always successful in the conduct of a client’s case when he devotedly and
dedicatedly applies the law to the facts of his client’s case irrespective of
the ruling or judgment of the court.

Lawyers, and indeed
law students must be reminded that a good lawyer should always be dispassionate
about the facts of cases presented to him by clients. A lawyer is only
permitted in the conduct of a case to be impassioned about the law and legal arguments
he avails a court vis-à-vis the facts of his client’s case. Where this is case,
the lawyer is always successful as his duties transcend the prosecution of a
mere brief from a client but extends to aiding the hallowed courts effect God’s
justice on earth.  

Henry Chibuike Ugwu
Esq.

Henrycugwu@gmail.com

---

Section 24 (a) of the Cybercrimes Act 2015 provides that – any person who knowingly or intentionally sends a message via a computer or network system which is false, grossly offensive, pornographic, obscene, indecent or menacing commits an offence and is liable to a fine of 7 (Seven) Million Naira and/or a term of up to 3 years imprisonment. 

@Legalnaija 

The Making of Responsible & Responsive Governance: X-Raying the Paul Usoro Leadership of the Nigerian Bar Association in the light of the “Putting You First” Mantra 

(By Sylvester Udemezue)

“A great leader’s courage to fulfill his 

vision comes from passion, not position.”

– John Maxwell

As the quarterly meeting of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) concludes in Abuja, the writer considers it necessary to take another look at some of the successes already recorded by the Paul Usoro-led NBA leadership between the time it came into office in August 2018 and March 2019, with a view to determining to what extent Mr Paul Usoro, SAN, has fulfilled his promise of presiding over a purpose-driven, result-oriented, responsible and responsive leadership of the NBA.

The Campaign Manifesto (the PUSAN Agenda)

It would be recalled that towards his aspiration to lead the Nigeria Bar as its President for the period, 2018 to 2020, Mr. Paul Usoro, SAN, had during the electioneering campaigns leading to the 2018 NBA national elections, presented a well laid-out manifesto and action plan to try to convince Nigerian Lawyers to afford him the opportunity to serve. The PUSAN Manifesto, as it was popularly called, was designed to pursue aggressive institutional development and regulatory reforms within and outside the NBA; to put in place a solid framework for human capital development and welfare programmes that would impact positively on the lives of Nigerian lawyers and the legal sector as a whole; and to promote rule of law and good governance in Nigeria. The PUSAN Manifesto came with the motto: Putting You First. 

Summary of the PUSAN Leadership Manifesto

With respect to institutional reforms, the major action plan the PUSAN manifesto intended to adopt in order to enhance efficiency in NBA operations, engender confidence and trust among NBA members, and increase the moral equity of the organization included the following: professionalizing and strengthening NBA’s National secretariat and entrenching corporate governance rules and etiquette in financial management; upgrading organizational capacity of the various NBA Sections, reforming NBA’s electoral system and succession plan and branch administration, establishing NBA liaison offices in Lagos, Port Harcourt and Kano, opening new vista for revenue generation in the interest of the NBA.

Paul Usoro’s promise of regulatory reforms was hinged on his promise to get the Legal Practitioners Act repealed and re-enacted to improve its effectiveness, to review the RPC, to embark on aggressive advocacy for incorporation of pupillage and mentoring into the curriculum of the Nigerian Law School, to partner with the National Universities Commission and Faculties of Law of Universities towards a proactive review the LL. B curriculum, and to reform NBA’s complaint, investigative and disciplinary channels and processes. And regarding the aspect of the PUSAN Manifesto related to human capital development and welfare programmes, Paul Usoro’s plan was to pursue and secure and an all-inclusive-bar, explore ways of overhauling the entire framework for legal training in Nigeria with a view to meeting up with international best practices in the profession, reform and rejig the Institute of Continuing Legal Education to be better positioned to achieve its core objectives, and establish a model Law Office at NBA’s national secretariat, among others. 

Furthermore, the following schemes were proposed to enhance the welfare and wellbeing of lawyers in Nigeria: capacity building and job creation for young lawyers, exposure and tightening of noose against quackery in the profession, development of verifiable database for lawyers in Nigeria, provision of business education and investment planning opportunities. Meanwhile, promotion and sustenance of rule of law, good governance and strong constitutional democracy remained a major plank upon which the PUSAN leadership philosophy was promoted. Specifically, this philosophy was founded on the following objectives: enhancing speedy and affordable access to justice, respect of human rights and obedience for court orders, checking executive lawlessness and impunity, promoting and advocating respect for independence and financial autonomy of the judiciary, promoting the pro bono concept in deserving circumstances, advocating the domestication of provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 to the state level. And to promote good governance, it was Paul Usoro’s plan to set up a strong team to monitor the conduct of the 2019 general elections and performance of election tribunals at the various levels, to put in place an advocate masterplan on strengthening legal and institutional framework for the anti-corruption crusade in Nigeria, and to contribute to building a stronger, credible and effective electoral system through voter education electoral reforms, among others.

Implementation of the PUSAN Manifesto

When the Paul Usoro leadership which commenced in August 2018 started putting forward the promise-fulfilled slogan within just a space of seven months, some saw it as mere talk. But sooner than later, reality caused doubts to give way to belief, acknowledgement and approbation in the minds of many Nigerian lawyers and the observing Nigerian public. It is now obvious that tremendous progress has been recorded even though the journey towards total implementation is still in progress as Rome was not built in a day. It is now clear to all that Mr Paul Usoro, SAN, has remained true to his promise of giving Nigerian Lawyers the best of a responsive, responsible, purposeful and results-oriented leadership. At this juncture, a brief highlight of some of the areas where vital progress has been recorded is necessary:

1. Corporate Governance: The first major step the Paul Usoro leadership took on taking over the affairs of the NBA as its president was to fully incorporate all aspects of core corporate governance structures and rules into the management of the NBA, and to instill fiscal transparency and leadership responsibility in the association’s affairs. At the NBA Secretariat, it is no longer business as usual!

2. Establishment of an E-portal: In line with its promise to see that Nigerian Lawyers no longer encountered any form of challenges while trying to pay for Bar Practicing Fees, etc., the Paul Usoro-led leadership has launched an online portal for the payment processes, bar practicing fees (BPF), including, stamp & seal. The NBA President (Paul Usoro, SAN) while announcing the birth of the innovative project on 10 February 2019, gave the benefits of the platform thus:

“The benefits of the NBA portal include the following: (1) Increased efficiency, seamless and instant payments (of all kinds) to the NBA including Bar Practice Fees. (2) Ease of payments to NBA by and from lawyers and other stakeholders. Payments can be made online, both within and outside Nigeria. (3) Enhanced use of technology for the efficient administration of the Bar and provision of services. The benefits include real-time information and data gathering.” (See https://thenigerialawyer.com/nba-launches-online-portal-for-its-payment-process-stampseal-bar-practice-fees-ors/, accessed 21 February 2019) 

Amplifying the President’s position, NBA’s National Publicity Secretary, Mr. Kunle Edun, explained that “what the NBA has done through its online payment portal is to facilitate an efficient, stress-free, technology-driven payment process of the BPF and other NBA related payments, for the benefit and comfort of our members, … the manual BPF payment method has not been scrapped; it co-exists side-by-side the online payment system (See https://dnllegalandstyle.com/2019/online-payment-of-bpf-steve-suns-argument-is-misconceived-nba/, accessed 27 March 2019)

3. Domestication of the ACJA, 2015: Collaboration with MacArthur Foundation towards realization of the proposed domestication of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015 in all states of the Federation of Nigeria.

4. Promotion of Rule of Law & Fight against Executive Lawlessness, Arbitrariness and Disobedience of Court Orders: NBA no longer sits on the fence! The PUSAN Leadership has energized and resuscitate the traditional role of NBA as the watchdog of Nigeria’s constitutional democracy, having the responsibility of promoting and sustaining independence of the judiciary, separation of powers and supremacy of rule of law. NBA can now be truly called fearless judging from its sustained and consistent efforts in speaking up and fighting against arbitrariness, lawlessness and abuse of power. This is manifest in the running battle the NBA leadership has waged against executive lawlessness, disobedience of court orders, contempt of court, to name a few.

5. Protection of the Independence of the Judiciary: The NBA leadership under Paul Usoro NBA has done a great deal already in its efforts at fighting off attempted external interference with the independence of the judiciary. The case of the illegally suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria, is a case in point. Apart from statements and other actions taken to condemn the illegal suspension of the CJN, the PUSAN Leadership with the assistance of the revered National Executive Committee (NEC) of the NBA rose to the occasion and organized and supervised a nation-wide court boycott to protest the unlawful and unjust suspension of the Hon Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen. (See https://punchng.com/nba-boycotts-courts-to-protest-onnoghens-suspension/). NBA orders layers to boycott courts for 2 days  (https://www.pulse.ng/news/local/nba-orders-lawyers-to-boycott-courts-for-2-days/5h4msec). NBA Demands Reversal of Onnoghen’s Suspension (See https://www.icirnigeria.org/nba-demands-reversal-of-onnoghens-suspension/)

6. Paul Usoro SAN was recently appointed a member of the Presidential Implementation Committee on Autonomy of the State Legislature and State Judiciary in accordance with the 4th Alteration of the 1999 Constitution. (See http://loyalnigerianlawyer.com/paul-usoro-appointed-as-member-of-committee-on-judiciary-legislature-autonomy/) As a member of the Committee, the PUSAN Leadership plans to bring its experience and drive into the Committee’s work with a view to ensuring that the best is achieved in line with the core objectives of the Committee. Besides, it is an opportunity to showcase some of the relevant items in the PUSAN Manifesto with a view to implementing them in the interest of Nigerian Lawyers and Nigeria as a whole. 

7. 2019 Elections Observation: Shortly before the 2019 Presidential elections, the NBA national leadership had constituted an Election-Observer Committee, ably chaired by Mr Afam Osuigwe, as an Internal Observer team for the Presidential and Governorship Elections. The work of the Committee was unprecedentedly successful and effective only because of Paul Usoro’s foresight in having selected only men of proven integrity and competence as Chairman and members of the Committee. (https://thenigerialawyer.com/nba-election-working-group-sets-up-situation-room-launches-toll-free-line-hashtags-for-2019-general-elections/) Our polls report, by NBA observers (See http://thenationonlineng.net/our-polls-report-by-nba-observers/). Headlines such as “Paul Usoro SAN And NBA’s Exemplary Work At #NigeriaDecides2019”  soon surfaced and littered the Nigerian social and print media space to testify to the exemplary leadership style of the Paus Usoro Leadership. (See https://www.legalnaija.com/2019/03/paul-usoro-san-and-nbas-exemplary-work.html)

8. Financial & Human Resources Audit of NBA: The PUSAN Leadership of the NBA has successfully undertaken both financial and human resources audit of the NBA to forestall leakages and waste of resources — human, material and financial resources. This has saved millions for the NBA.

9. Prompt Delivery of Stamp & Seal: Delivery of stamp and seal to applicants is now completed within a maximum of 14 days from the date of payment, and all complaints are resolved within 48 hours of receipt, unlike in the past when it took months to get the seal already paid for by verified legal practitioners. 

10. Seamless Interaction of the National leadership with Branch Chairmen: The PUSAN Presidency has established a platform to interact with all branch Chairmen and secretaries of the NBA across Nigeria for a seamless and more effective administration of the branches, prompt feedback and reporting.

11. Response to Unjust or Illegal Harassment of NBA Members: The Paul Usoro-led leadership has successfully waded into and resolved all reported cases of harassment of Nigerian Lawyers in the course of their lawful discharge of the professional responsibilities. NBA has on many occasions risen in defence of members of the legal profession who are unlawfully harassed by security agencies. The motto for the PUSAN presidency in this regard is “An attack against one lawyer anywhere in Nigeria is an attack against all lawyers in Nigeria and attack against NBA itself.” Hence, NBA would never fold its arms and watch any member either of the Bar or of the Bench to be illegally harassed or victimized!

12. Curriculum Review in the Nigerian Law school: The PUSAN leadership has begun relevant negotiations with the Management of Nigerian Law School towards a review of the School’s curriculum with a view to inculcating pupillage and mentoring as promised in the PUSAN Manifecto.

13. Quality Appointment & Representation at Panels, Regulatory Bodies and Government Agencies: With the inception of the PUSAN presidency efforts are made on each occasion to ensure that NBA members appointed or nominated to represent NBA in Government Committees, Panels, Regulatory Authorities and Agencies are lawyers of proven integrity with established and acknowledged expertise, instead of the attitude of just re-cycling of bar men. Apart from being a giant step in the right direction, in the spirit of having square peg in a square hole, with a view to ensuring that the NBA is competently represented in such bodies, such innovative step leaves quite a refreshing difference in the quality of contributions made by these nominees and appointees. 

14. Independence of the NBA:   To ensure that NBA remains independent, and free to pursue and fulfil its core mandate, the Paul Usoro leadership has put a stop to the hitherto rampant attitude of  NBA national Leadership accepting State Governors’ offer of sponsorship of NBA National Executive Committee (NEC) Meetings in a manner that forced the NEC meetings to rotate around different venues and places in the country, while the NBA House, a giant architectural edifice located in the heart of Abuja, FCT, lies fallow. NBA under Mr. Usoro, SAN, has now insisted and ensured that NBA NEC Meetings are held in the NBA House in Abuja. Apart from several other benefits recorded with this innovative prudent step, this has also contributed in extricating the NBA from its previous attachment and hobnobbing with various State Governments in a meaner that constituted a sort of hindrance and also made NBA less free and independent-minded to pursue its goals.

15. Cost Management: The Paul Usoro Leadership has completely trimmed the huge workforce at the NBA Secretariat in Abuja, as well as put in place measures to ensure considerable reduction in waste of resources. The decision to permanently hold NBA NEC meetings at the NBA House is one of such measures.

The writer would like to end by referring us to the words of Ronald Regan (40th president of the United States of America): “the greatest leader is not necessarily the one who does the greatest things. He is the one that gets the people to do the greatest things.” This is one attribute, among many, that stands the Paul Usoro leadership out — humility and foresight in selecting the right people for jobs—as this writer stated earlier, putting square pegs in square holes! But it is not just that; Mr Paul Usoro also gives his team members the freedom and liberty to operate freely within the rules. This accords with Theodore Roosevelt advice, that “the best leader is the one who has sense enough to pick good men to do what he wants done, and the self-restraint to keep from meddling with them while they do it.”

As the Paul Usoro leadership continues in its giant strides towards repositioning the Nigerian Bar Association for a greater future, I heartily congratulate Mr Usoro on his successful hosting of the NEC meeting for March 2019. However, I once again urge Mr. Paul Usoro, SAN to Remain Focused and carrying along his team members and indeed everyone, in all his plans and programs. For this purpose, I recall my earlier words which I believe is still as effective today as it was when I wrote them:

“Leaders that aim to succeed must adopt all-inclusiveness as their motto, so as to be able to create an environment in which all individuals and sections feel empowered to express their opinions freely within the larger group. Leaders ought also to realize that diversity of thinking is critical to effective collaboration and management; thus, they must pay close attention to team composition and team processes in order to fish out all capable hands to work with for success…. a leader has not begun leading until the leader has learned to rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all members of society he leads, and in fact the whole of humanity. In Jesse Jackson’s words, “inclusiveness is not a matter of political correctness. It is the key to growth. When everyone is included, everyone wins.” (See accessed 28 March 2019)

Finally, to all Nigerian lawyers, fellow NBA members, we must remain together in love and peace, cooperating with and advising our leaders, on how to make the NBA better and greater, with a view to elevating the NBA to a level where it becomes the cynosure of all eyes, a leading light, and a perfect example for other sectors and professional groups to copy from. We are not yet where we ought to be. But with the innovative and result-driven leadership of Mr. Paul Usoro, SAN, we sure have left where we used to be. With all hands on the deck, we would get to the promised land. United we stand! 

Respectfully,

Sylvester Udemezue 

(28/March/2019)

ADDRESS DELIVERED AT THE NBA NATIONAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (“NEC”) MEETING AT THE NBA SECRETARIAT IN ABUJA. 

My Dear Colleagues

It gives me great pleasure to welcome you all to the 2018/2019 Quarter 3 NEC meeting of our great Association. We thank the Almighty for journey mercies from our various destinations for this meeting. This is the second NEC meeting of our administration and it is interesting to observe how time flies: almost seven months of our tenure is already gone and we are left with a year and a half to cram in so much that must be achieved for the betterment of our members, our Association and the Nigerian society. So, what have we achieved in the months after our last Quarterly NEC Meeting that was held on 06 December 2018? I will in the succeeding paragraphs give you, my dear colleagues, a summary of our activities in the last several months.

Last Quarter Significant Activities

Online Payment Platform

One of our significant achievements this year has been the introduction of online payment system for the payment of Bar Practice Fees (“BPF”) by our members. Gone are the days when our members had no choice but to queue at banking halls and go through the tedious manual processes for the payment of their BPF. Now they can make their payments online from the comfort of their homes or wherever else they may be, at any time of the day or night including weekends and even from outside Nigeria. The plan which is already in the works is to extend this online payment facility to cover payments for all other NBA National-related fees and dues payable by our members and third parties. 

Financial Accountability, Transparency and Prudence

We have, at this NEC meeting, published the Management Accounts of our Association for Quarter 2 of 2018/2019. That is a promise kept and a statement made on the resolve of your National Officers to be consistent in being financially accountable and transparent in the management of the NBA’s funds. Our commitment which you should hold us to is that, not a Quarter will pass in the two years of our administration without our publishing the NBA’s Quarterly Financial Statement. One of the positive knock-on consequences and effects of financial accountability and transparency is that it forces prudence on the managers of the Association’s funds, knowing as we do, that there must be an accounting to our members for every expenditure that we make as published in the Financial Statements. That fact is always present in our minds and, in part, informs the prudent management of the Association’s funds by this administration as you would find in our Q2 Management Accounts which we would present to this august body shortly.

Secretariat Reforms

As part of our campaigns, we had committed to institute internal reforms in our Secretariat such that it would be responsive to our members’ needs and serve the Association better. The feedback I receive from our members almost on a daily basis has been overwhelming in that regard. I have heard from members how their problems were resolved in quick time merely through phone calls to our Secretariat personnel. It is no longer news that stamps are delivered to our members within days of the orders being received at the Secretariat from the Branches. The extremely

few complaints that we have received in this regard were resolved in quick time and always in a manner that exonerated our National Secretariat of any blame or fault. To enhance the Secretariat’s efficiency, we would be placing before you, our NEC members, in the course of this meeting, for your kind approval, a new fit-for- purpose organogram. 

One of the innovations in the new organogram is the inclusion of the position of an Internal Auditor. In any properly organized establishment, the Internal Auditor is significant livewire personnel for ensuring prudence and accountability in financial management. His role is so central to achieving these ideals such that no serious and successful organization operates in modern times without the personnel that fulfills that role. In our match towards the entrenchment of financial transparency, accountability and prudence, we consider that position critical for the NBA and we are counting on the support of the NEC in approving the new organogram which includes that function.

Website Revamp

Work has started on the revamping and modernization of our website. The NBA deserves a modern website with the right customer experience, aesthetics and functionality and that is what we are committed to unveiling by or before the next NEC meeting. Websites, apart from serving as information portals have their functional uses. Their interactive profile in modern times allows for online resolution of problems and issues by visitors to the website. These are attributes that absent but which we will be introducing in our revamped and modernized website.

Prior to now, separate standalone websites were created each year for our Annual General Conference (“AGC”). From this year, our AGC portal will be hosted in our NBA website and there would be no need for the award of yearly contracts for the creation of websites solely for our AGC event. Some of our Sections currently have their own independent standalone websites which are not linked to the NBA website. SPIDEL is the only one without a website and the plan is for that Section to be housed and hosted at the NBA website. Links would be created between the modernized NBA website and the current standalone SBL and SPL websites.

As earlier mentioned,the online payment platform which is hosted at the NBA website would be enhanced to cover online payments of all fees and dues to the Association. The website enhancement would include the creation of an online platform for ordering stamps in a manner that would ensure that branch dues and other branch levies are fully paid and satisfied by the person making the order as a condition precedent to the placement of the orders. Let me quickly assure that we would, in expanding these frontiers ensure that the Branches are fully carried along and their concerns addressed and resolved.

2019 National Elections’ Monitoring

The 2019 National Elections have come and are gone albeit with the rumbles remaining. We acquitted ourselves very well in monitoring those elections and publishing objective, fact-based reports thereon. As you would recall, the Osun State Governorship elections provided us with a test-run in the monitoring of this year’s elections and we did not lower nor deviate from the high standards that that were set by our monitors in that election. I must here thank all our members countrywide who volunteered for the monitoring exercise and duly sent their reports including photographic images to the National Committee for compilation of our reports. For the Governorship Elections that were held on 09 March 2019, the Branches did not receive a dime from the National body and yet, our members joyfully and enthusiastically volunteered and creditably carried out their monitoring functions and sent reports to the National Committee the end result of which is the final Monitoring Committee Report that would be presented to NEC at this meeting.

Welfare of Members

Our members have for some time now been clamouring for the resuscitation of the life insurance cover that used to be in place for our members, but which unfortunately was not renewed and was therefore not operative in the last couple of years. We have hearkened to the calls of our members and, apart from having discussions with Leadway Assurance Plc, the company that originally provided us with the insurance cover that became defunct, we have held talks with WAPIC Insurance Plc, another reputable insurance company. Both organizations have made presentations to us on insurance covers that extend beyond life and include medical expenses, temporary and permanent disabilities and critical illness benefits. Their proposals have been uploaded and placed before NEC for final consideration and approval. As soon as approval is obtained, we would work to reinstitute this welfare package for the benefit of our members.

Technical Committee for Conference Planning (“TCCP”)

This year, we started the planning of our Annual General Conference quite early. NEC had, during our 06 December 2018 meeting, graciously given me the anticipatory approval to constitute the Committee which I did and would presently, in the course of this meeting, present the membership list to members. One of the innovations that we introduced in the constitution of this year’s TCCP is that we appointed three Chairmen from each of the NBA Zones as members of the Committee and representatives of their respective zones. The Chairmen directly feel the pulse of our members in the Branches and we believe that those of them that have been appointed as members of the TCCP would better appreciate the thought-process that goes into the planning and organization of the AGC apart from their bringing fresh and vibrant perspectives into the Committee’s work schedule. We are confident that this year’s TCCP will deliver on the promise of a world-class AGC that would be within the economic reach of our members. The Committee would be presenting their first report to NEC very shortly.

Rule of Law

Perhaps,the single most dominant and talked-about issue in our professional life this year has been issues and matters concerning our Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honorable Mr. Walter S N Onnoghen, GCON (“Onnoghen CJN”). Our current travails as represented by the Onnoghen CJN saga is too well known to all of us and too painful to bear recounting. Suffice to state that throughout this unfortunate and bewildering incident, the NBA has stood on the side and in defense of the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary and the principles of separation of powers between the three arms of government. As we have consistently pointed out, the Onnoghen CJN incident is but a metaphor for these immortal and immutable principles. It reminds us of how dangerously insecure the tenure of our judicial officers is, by extension, how susceptible to attack the independence of our judiciary is. These principles, we must reiterate, have no political, tribal or religious colourations and the positions of the NBA were impervious and blind to these divisive and inhibiting considerations.

We must commend our members who stood up to be counted in the struggle for the promotion and protection of the rule of law vis-à-vis the Onnoghen CJN saga and it is our earnest hope that the Executive arm of the Federal Government of Nigeria would see reason not only to terminate the on-going ugly and self-immolating spectacle at the Code of Conduct Tribunal but also find a way to resolve all the surrounding issues relating to Onnoghen CJN in a way and manner that would retrieve for us all and in our collective interest what may be left of the shredded and tattered dignity of our justice sector. The NBA remains unrelenting in its campaign in this regard.

Focus in the Coming Months

I must, at this point, highlight some of the significant issues and activities that will engage our minds and occupy our time and efforts in the coming months before our next NEC meeting:

Constitution and Electoral Review

NEC had graciously granted mean anticipatory approval for the composition of the Constitution and Electoral Review Committee. We would be publishing the composition of the Committee in the next couple of days with matching orders for them to consult with our members and Branches and come up with a reviewed Constitution and Electoral process for our Association. Similar to the composition of our TCCP, we would ensure that representative Chairmen are appointed to this Committee from the Branches. The Committee would have a timeline that would ensure the presentation of the amended Constitution at our Annual General Meeting that would be held during the AGC in August 2019.

Alternative Sources of Funds

Given the Association’s debt overhang as shown in our Financial Statement, it is imperative that we have alternative sources of funds. This is an area that we would be working quite hard at in the coming months including raising funds from our patrons and members. We would update NEC with our efforts in this regard. 

Clean Data Capture. 

We have already started working on the verification of our membership data as a prelude to creating a clean database of our members which would be used for all purposes including but not at all limited to our NBA elections. This was one of our significant campaign promises and we are hoping to be largely done with this project by or before the AGC in August 2019.

Young Lawyers

In the coming days and months, we would pay more than the ordinary attention to issues concerning our young lawyers starting with the constitution of the Council of the Young Lawyers Forum for which NEC had graciously granted me an anticipatory approval during the 06 December 2018 meeting. Happily, we have great champions of young lawyers amongst the National Officers one of the leading ones being Akorede Habeeb Lawal, our Assistant Publicity Secretary. He could easily pass as one of the most young-lawyers-centric members of our Team and he bubbles with several ideas and thoughts concerning young lawyers most of which he has shared with me and which we plan to implement in the coming months.

Rule of Law

The promotion and protection of the Rule of Law is the lead motif of and for our Association. It permeates the entirety of our professional lives and is not dated howsoever; it is a principle and fight that is immutable and alive at all times and demands eternal vigilance. We would continue to live up to our commitment in this regard. In the coming months, we would beam even more searchlight into the crevices of our national life where the Rule of Law and its twin principle, the Fundamental Rights of our people, may be under assault and in bondage. We would continue to speak out in defense of these principles and will equally commend the authorities when such commendations are deserved

FRN v Usoro

I cannot conclude this Address without updating you, my NEC members, on my prosecution by the EFCC on allegations of money laundering. I had presented to you during our 06 December 2018 NEC meeting the facts of this Charge. Those facts have not changed howsoever. The Proof of Evidence which was subsequently served on me does not contain any fact that contradicts the position that I presented to you, to wit, that I am being prosecuted for (a) professional fees totaling N1.1bn that were legitimately earned and paid to Paul Usoro & Co (“PUC”) by Akwa Ibom State Government (“AKSG”) between 2015 and 2016; and (b) professional fees totaling N300m that were paid to PUC by Governor Udom Emmanuel of Akwa Ibom State for the benefit of our colleagues who provided professional services to the Governor.

The PUC Bank Statement of Account that forms part of the Proof of Evidence clearly shows that the N300m was duly paid to those colleagues of ours who rendered those services to the Governor. The N1.1bn was not and is not the property of AKSG and nobody, apart from the EFCC, has claimed otherwise. The N300m to the best of my knowledge was not paid from the coffers of AKSG and no one apart from the EFCC has so claimed. As the trial unfolds, we will keep our members duly informed. 

I must thank all our members, from the depths of my heart, for the overwhelming support and solidarity that Mfon and I have enjoyed and received from all of you across the nation. You have seen this persecution for what it is: a struggle for the soul of our profession and means of livelihood and not just the persecution of Paul. We are so very touched by your faith in us and your show of love, from telephone calls, personal visits, text messages and other forms of communication. I must also thank most sincerely, my team of lawyers, led by our past President, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN for all their work on my behalf. We cannot repay you for this show of faith and love for and in us. Our prayers is that the Almighty will reward you all abundantly. We feel confident that our collective efforts would be rewarded and truth will ultimately out and we will all be vindicated.

Perhaps, I need to mention here that my current persecution is not isolated. As a profession, we are under siege. For the very first time, both in our country’s history and in the history of our Association, the NBA Elections of 2018 has been the subject of purported investigation by the EFCC. I do not believe that such an investigation is within the purview of the EFCC, seeing as there was no financial or economic crime that was alleged. I am also not aware that the EFCC has taken as much interest in the activities of other professionals and their associations as it has taken in our profession and our Association, particularly in recent years. To put it mildly, our profession and indeed the justice sector, I repeat, is under siege. Even the Independent Corrupt Practice Commission (“ICPC”) has taken to inviting our past Presidents and General Secretaries for questioning over the contract award for the construction of our National Secretariat.

But then,these agencies do not act alone; they act in close collaboration with some of our members. The petition that triggered the purported EFCC investigation into our 2018 Elections, for example, was written by one of our members. Indeed, we have taken to reporting ourselves to the EFCC even in internal matters of the Association which could be resolved internally. We do need to rethink our ways and reassess our circumstances in this regard, in our collective interest, for our collective good and for the good of our profession and our Association.

Conclusion

In concluding, I must thank the President of the National Industrial Court, Honorable Justice B A Adejumo, for graciously sponsoring the cocktail that was held for our NEC members last night, Wednesday, 27 March 2019. The Chief Judge of the Federal Capital Territory, Honorable Justice Ishaq Bello, was kind enough to provide us with the venue for the cocktail. Our gratitude also goes to our distinguished colleague, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Mr. Boss Mustapha, who is partially sponsoring the dinner event this evening for our members. Access Bank Plc has also donated for the hosting of this NEC meeting and we thank them most sincerely.

Once again, I thank all of you, my NEC members, for your support and consistent encouragement. I wish us all fruitful deliberations in this NEC meeting and a safe journey back to our various Branches. Long live the Nigerian Bar Association. Long live the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Paul Usoro, SAN President