Man’s increasing thirst
for power since the dawn of time is the premise for which Separation of Powers
and a system of Checks and Balances is ingrained in the roots of democratic
governance. If power corrupts, then absolute power corrupts absolutely. According
to Charles de Montesquieu, “when the legislative and executive powers are
united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no
liberty”. The essence of Democracy, the Rule of Law and the security of
Human rights is to give man a good life and liberty against arbitrary or
unrestrained exercise of power. If powers are not definitely shared, the path
to tyranny is not far-off.

The concept of
separation of powers stands frontward in the interaction of the three branches
of government; the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. The Nigerian
constitution captures the doctrine of separation of powers to prevent one arm
of government, specifically the executive, from becoming excessively powerful,
enough to destroy the system. Under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria, federal legislative power is vested in the National
Assembly, while executive power is vested in the President and the judiciary with
the power to interpret laws, by virtue of Sections 4, 5 and 6 respectively.

In performing his
executive functions, the President may issue orders to agents and agencies of
the executive branch in respect of a project or programme. These orders may set
out government policies, issue directives or command action relating to
functions of the executive arm. An order issued by the President becomes rather
controversial when it purports to make law (1). There is no express
mention of executive orders in the constitution, howbeit, executive orders are
an offspring of constitutional development, especially, in the history of the
development of presidential power in the United States (2). It is usually
following the presidential instinct to ‘execute and maintain’ the provisions of
the constitution (3).

The President’s power
to issue executive orders raises the problem of lack of clarity in separation
of powers. If executive orders have the force of law, it goes without saying
that Presidents have the power to make laws by issuing executive orders.
However, there is a counterbalance considering that this power is also
controlled and checked by the Judiciary. Executive orders are advantageous
because they are required to fill in the gaps in legislations creating
executive agencies. A good instance of such
executive order would be Executive Order 5, issued by the President relating
chiefly to promotion of Nigerian content in public procurement of goods and
services. The use of executive orders is also necessary in occasions of
regulatory contradiction and uncertainty in Nigeria (4).

Like legislative
statutes, executive orders are subject to judicial review and may be overturned
if the order lacks support by statute or the Constitution, if the order demands
an action that will be illegal, or if the order contravenes one or more doctrines
of democracy. A critical case on Presidential executive orders is Attorney General
of Abia State & ORS V. Attorney General of the Federation [2003] 4 NWLR (PT
809)124. In this case, the Supreme Court considered the validity of the
promulgation of the Revenue Allocation (Federal Account, Etc) (Modification)
Order (Statutory Instrument No. 9 of 2002). Belgore, JSC held that the promulgation
order was indeed constitutional and valid seeing as the then President of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, acted pursuant to Section
315 of the 1999 Constitution. Courts, however, do not readily invalidate
executive orders and the legislature cannot impose a general prohibition on the
use of executive orders, as noted by the Supreme Court in Attorney General of
the Federation v Abubakar [2007] 10 NWLR (Pt 1041)1 (1).

Like drugs, the
authority granted to the President to make an executive order can be misused. Truly,
an executive order issued by the president, with a goal to ‘execute and
maintain’ the terms of the constitution, can engender the adherence to
democratic principles, consequently advancing the practice of democracy. Nonetheless,
if misused, an executive order can set a nation on the path to tyranny.

Since the return to
democracy in 1999, each successive government in Nigeria has signed a number of
executive orders, President Muhammadu Buhari’s government inclusive. Commonly,
the news of the signing of a new executive order is greeted with either public
outcry at worst or with mass apathy at best (5). Some of the orders
issued by President Muhammadu Buhari’s government include:

Executive Order No.1,
on the Promotion of Transparency and Efficiency in the Business Environment. The
mischief of this order is to facilitate the ease of doing business in Nigeria
through the promotion of transparency and efficiency in the business
environment (6).

Executive Order No.2,
on the Promotion of local content in public procurement by the Federal Government.
This order’s mischief is to grant preference to local manufacturers of goods
and service providers in their procurement of goods and services.

Executive Order No.3,
for the Timely Submission of annual budgetary estimates by all statutory and
non-statutory agencies, including companies owned by the Federal Government. This
order addresses the delay in the passage and assent of National Budget
occasioned by the late preparation and transmission of budget estimates by Ministries,
Agencies and Departments (MDAs), with the 2016 and 2017 budgets as befitting
reference points.

Executive Order No.4,
on the Voluntary Assets and Income Declaration Scheme (VAIDS), to increase the
level of Tax awareness and compliance, widen the tax net, and reduce incidence
of tax evasion in the country. Also, to offer amnesty until March 31, 2018 (later
extended to 30 June, 2018) to tax payers (individuals and corporate bodies) who
have defaulted in their obligations in the past.

Executive Order No.5,
to improve local content in public procurement with Science, Engineering and Technology
components. The executive order is expected to promote the application of
science, technology and innovation towards achieving the nation’s development
goals across all sectors of the economy (7).

Executive Order No.6,
on the Preservation of Suspicious Assets connected with corruption and other
relevant offences. This order sought to fight corruption by curtailing certain
liberties and fundamental rights of Nigerians (8).
The order prevents persons guilty of corruption from continuously holding and
controlling asset acquired from proceeds of corruption.

Executive Order No.10,
which merely affirms the financial autonomy already donated to State
Legislature, Judiciary, and by the Constitution, strengthens them as
institutions, and makes them truly independent from the suffocating grip of
State Governors. This ensures transparency, accountability and responsibility
in government; broadens and deepens the democratic space; and signposts the
much-desired restructuring and power devolution (8)

These executive
orders do not escape criticisms. Particularly, President Buhari’s Executive
Order No.6 raised controversies as to its constitutionality and validity seeing
as it invalidates the rights to property guaranteed in Sections 43 and 44 of
the 1999 Nigerian Constitution. According to the President, the order aims to
“restrict dealings in suspicious assets subject to investigation or inquiry
bordering on corruption in order to preserve such assets from dissipation and
to deprive alleged criminals of the proceeds of their illicit activities which
can otherwise be employed to allure, pervert and/or intimidate the
investigative and judicial processes” (9).

Indeed, democracy
cannot flourish in the dearth of clear and precise separation of powers and an
operative system of checks and balances (10).
This is a challenge for the legal profession and the Judiciary to understand
the constitutional, political and policy contexts of the exercise of executive
power in order to prevent the executive arm from exceeding its power limits,
safeguard human rights and liberties, and save the democratic society that is
Nigeria.

Adeniran
Oluwabukunmi.

References

1. Okebukola and Kana. Executive Orders in Nigeria as
Valid Legislative Instruments and Administrative Tools.

2.
Historical Development of Separation of Powers. LawTeacher. 2019.

3.
Sam, Amadi. Executive order 10 of 2020 is dangerous to constitutional democracy.
2020.

4.
—. Executive Order and presidential power in the Nigerian constitutional
democracy. TheGuardian. 2018.

5.
Jonathan, Ekpo. A Critique Of The Companies Income Tax (Road Infrastructure
Development And Refurbishment Investment Tax Credit Scheme) Order 2018.

6.
Ladan, M.T. Presidential Executive Orders 1-6 Of May 2017 to July 2018 as
Enforceable Legislative Instruments In Nigeria [As At July 6, 2018]. 2018.

7.
Law, Bloomfield. Nigeria: President Muhammadu Buhari Signs Executive Order To
Improve Local Contents In Science, Engineering & Technology Procurement.
2018.

8.
Nigeria: Is President Buhari’s Executive Order 10 Constitutional? AllAfrica.
2020.

9.
Dayo, Adu and Ridwan, Oloyede. President of Nigeria Signs Executive Order 6
of 2018 on the Preservation of Assets Connected With Serious Corruption and
Other Relevant Offences. 2018.

10.
Simon, Rogo. Nigeria: Executive Order 10 Will Deepen Democracy. 2020.

 Photo Credit – www.saynigeria.com 

Without a doubt, the Lagos Branch of the NBA since the inception of the NBA has produced not less than six (6) Presidents of the Bar, the most recent of which is the out-going President in the person of Paul Usoro, SAN. If the outgoing President was produced by the Lagos Bar, will it be fair for the Lagos Bar to produce another President? I do not think so, and I believe the entire objective of zoning principle will be defeated if only one Branch is to constantly produce the President of the NBA. I concede that the second schedule to the NBA Constitution divided the country into geographical zones, with rotation between the three (3) zones i.e. Northern zone, Eastern zone and Western zone, and does not extend such divide or dichotomy to branches. However, it will be inequitable and unjust for one branch to always produce the NBA President? This will not augur well and in no distant time some branches will become indifferent to NBA activities. The presidency of the NBA should not be the birthright of just one branch.

It is on this note that I lend my voice to the appeal to our brothers from the Lagos Bar to have a rethink and support the candidate of the Ikeja Bar in the person of Deacon Dele Adesina, SAN because if care is not taken there is a likelihood that this election will sever the mutual relationship that has existed between the Ikeja Bar and Lagos Bar of the NBA. I also call on all well-meaning members of the NBA Ikeja Branch to rise up at this time and say NO to the marginalization of the Ikeja branch by voting en masse for Deacon Dele Adesina, SAN, in the election at the end of this month (July). We also seek the support of members of the Ikorodu and Badagry Branches of the NBA at this time because a time will come when they will also seek the support of the Ikeja Branch in the NBA National election.

May I also thank the Care-taker Committee of the NBA, Ikeja Branch for re-affirming the earlier motion of the immediate past Executives adopting Deacon Dele Adesina, SAN as the sole candidate of the Ikeja Branch of the NBA.

Thank You.

– CHUKWUDI ENEBELI, MCIArb.
(Partner Pinheiro LP)

As a young lawyer, I have always agitated for a vibrant leader for the Bar and that made me join in canvasing for a particular candidate from the onset for a brighter bar, little did I know that I am about selling my conscience for *Semo*.

At first, I thought it was a Palliative, but on a deeper thought, I wondered what Palliative to lawyers will come in form of Semo and Rice few weeks to the election. I have to sit down and think deeply and I begin to re-examine all the presidential candidates in this election.

I am a member of different presidential candidates platforms, I observed that while some are ready to offer nothing but Semo and Rice, another candidate is not sharing anything but enjoys large followership.

I took interest in one candidate who didn’t share anything and still pulling crowd. Therefore, I thought and asked myself who is DASAN and why is he gaining this unprecedented followership?

I came to find out that DASAN is not interested in money/Amala Politics but for a secured bar with brighter future for the young lawyers. If the Bar has not been restructured by Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN led Executive having Dele Adesina SAN as the Chief Scribe then, the Bar would probably have been reduced to nothing today, but thank God for using the administration to institute several good policies that have become permanent structures in NBA till today.

I look at his experience, profile and protests he has led in the past to agitate for the promotion of Rule of Law and against inhuman treatment of lawyers and other citizens, I therefore had no choice than to run away from where they offer nothing other than sharing of Semo and Rice.

The question that readily comes to mind is what are we turning ourselves to? Should Pandemic turn some of us (lawyers) to beggars? My answer is No, but we should stand firmly with a candidate who with or without pandemic we can assess him and come to a honourable decision without being cajoled with Rice and Semo. We are not secular politicians.

I didn’t regret joining any group before. I am only convinced about candidacy of DASAN having reviewed the developments around me, more importantly, the fact that all our leading lights in the profession in Ilorin are with DASAN. This helped me a long way in realising that DASAN truly is a candidate that is good for the Bar.

I am now an official supporter of Dele Adesina SAN and I am officially saying bye to a candidate who does not meant good for the betterment of the bar

I must state emphatically that I don’t have control over anyone’s conscience, but I think giving Dele Adesina SAN the support he needs will make the future of the Bar secured and greater.

Mujaid Oloyede BALOGUN Esq.
Ilorin Bar.

Although
remote working was practiced before the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, in
recent times it has become increasingly popular in various industries as a
means of ensuring that business stays open in spite of movement restrictions
that were introduced to curtail the spread of the virus.

Remote
working has thus far received a favourable response from both employers and
employees and as such some companies are considering making it a permanent
arrangement by looking into having remote working policies. Remote working
gives employers the opportunity to access a larger talent pool and can help
them in saving cost.

There
are certain legal considerations that employers of labour need to take note of
when employing remote labour.

1.    CYBERSECURITY RISKS AND ACCESS TO
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

Remote
working relies heavily on the use of technology to facilitate communication
between employers, employees and clients. Employers need to ensure that
necessary steps are taken to address the issue of cybersecurity risks and data
breaches especially when sensitive documents have to be accessed from home or
remote locations. Access to such documents must be restricted only to
authorized staff.

The
Nigeria Data Protection Regulation 2019 requires that those involved in data
processing or the control of data develop security measures to protect data.
This would involve protecting systems from hackers, setting up firewalls,
storing data securely with access to specific authorized individuals, employing
data encryption technologies, developing organizational policy for handling
personal data (and other sensitive or confidential data), protection of
emailing systems and continuous capacity building for staff.

Employers
must realize that by virtue of the provisions of the NDPR 2019, there is a duty
of care owed to a data subject in respect of their personal data. By extension,
employees who are authorized to have access to such information in the course
of their work would also be expected to handle such personal data with care.

2.    ELIGIBILITY FOR REMOTE WORK

It must
be noted that not all jobs can be done remotely. Thus, employers would need to
clearly state whether or not a particular role can be carried out remotely in
their remote working policies in order to avoid confusion.

3.    MEASURING PRODUCTIVITY AND
OVERTIME

Work
done in the office premises often takes place during defined hours. Time spent
working in addition to these defined working hours would be considered overtime
and, depending on the agreement of parties, employees may be compensated for
such additional work.

Due to
the flexibility introduced by remote working, it is generally misconstrued that
remote workers do less work than those working within office premises. However,
studies have shown that employees working remotely do more work, attend more
meetings and oftentimes attend to work demands at odd hours. Therefore,
employers may need to factor guidelines for the measurement of productivity and
compensation for overtime in their remote working policies.

4.    REMUNERATION

Employers
are expected to continue paying wages as agreed on. However, in recognition of
the hardships that the pandemic may have caused the business, parties may be
required to modify the employment contract through renegotiation of terms.

For
more information, contact:

GRF
Dalley & Partners

Lagos Office:
Gabsdall House (2^nd – 4^th Floor)
26, Igbosere Road

Port Harcourt Office:
13, Finima Street,
Old G.R.A.

Tel: +23414549824
Email: inq@grfdalleyandpartners.com

On the scales of experience and exposure to the dynamics of the highly esteemed Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr. Adesina (SAN) is a perfectly round peg in a round hole who is embellished with incontestable and crystal clear distinction in height, like mount Everest among other mountains of the earth. Matchlessly colossal and towering in glistering gloss of pure gold of experience, Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) obviously and deeply sight-grasps the past (in indispensable knowledge of ‘the way and how’ of the NBA), understands the present (in indispensable knowledge of challenges and the path to overcoming them), and sees further far into the future for the good of all (hence, his overture towards securing the good future of the Bar). Mr. Adesina (SAN) understands the journey. He knows the flanks and terrain. Reiteratively speaking, indispensible is his experience at this time in the life of the Nigerian Bar.

Taking off from the humble grounds of civil service as a state counsel prior to his overtures towards private practice, and making splendid contributions to intellectual discourse in law through his lectures and write-ups, Mr. Adesina (SAN) has navigated through all flanks of the esteemed Nigerian Bar Association with records of phenomenal success. Now, in 2020, Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) aspires to lead the Nigerian Bar Association in the capacity as President. Surely, the crown does not just only look good, but looks sparklingly best on Mr. Dele Adesina’s head. 

Mr. Adesina’s loyalty to the profession is amazing—with a spice and taste of folk like heroics in his salvaging of the wig and gown in the heat of arson driven mob rage during a political crisis in the 80’s. What manner of passion or goodwill this is(?) may be a question arising within those who come across this phenomenal deed in his well packaged profile. An answer to the question is definitely bound to be found in ‘the will to rescue’ what he deemed to hold in principal value amongst his material fabrics. Yes! ‘Let every other garment burn, but not my wig and gown” is, perhaps, the resolution within Mr. Adesina’s mind under a state of tension as he helplessly watched his properties face destruction by fire at that challenging time of his history. Let Mr. Adesina (SAN) be reminded of this heroic in his noble quest to lead the highly esteemed Nigerian Bar Association—and have his spirit awakened to maintain this outstanding consistency of ‘will to rescue’ for transposition into his anticipated era as President. It comes as no surprise, however, that his motto, which mirror’s his ‘will to power’, is “securing the future of the Bar”. In this stance, he is trust worthy.

Another shining exemplary instance where he demonstrated goodwill, passion, and drive towards the Bar was while he served as the General Secretary of the NBA. At that time in issue—which was dark in the annals of the NBA—the Chairman of Onitsha Branch of the NBA (Mr. Barnabas Igwe) and his wife (Mrs Abigail Igwe/also a lawyer), were cold bloodedly murdered. In the annals of NBA officially rising to the occasion through its officers when it mattered, reportedly, with the support and approval of the overall leadership, Mr. Dele Adesina practically moved the Secretariat to Onitsha. NBA was so moved to operate like a double edged sword. Aside from making attempts to get justice on one hand, Mr. Adesina, responsibly, was instrumental and pivotal to “securing the future” of children of late Barnabas and Abigail Igwe. On the march, he was able to move the mass, weight and currents of the NBA to raise a sum of N20,000,000 (twenty million naira) as endowment for the upkeep and education of the orphaned children. There are a plethora of inspiring demonstrations of good and humane leadership by Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) at the local and national levels of NBA administration.

Mr. Dele Adesina has definitely seen what many other’s don’t or haven’t, and he requires our assistance and assurance through voting in his favor to assume that position of authority which will enable him launch his good ‘will to power’ and secure the best possible visions he has perceived and conceived for the highly esteemed Nigerian Bar Association. Every vote in his favor matters. Therefore, as we move to vote in the coming election, let it echo in a sonorous orchestral harmony within us that “the crown does not just only look good, but looks sparklingly best on Mr. Dele Adesina’s head”.

Mr. Adesina’s aspiration is not limited to just being the NBA President for purpose of executing the professional society’s development agenda. In his mission statement, it is clearly spelt out that the NBA will also be driven to the point of influencing, and contributing to, nation building. This is proof of capacity for innovation, dynamism and positive community influence. This is believable; particularly wherein one peruses through the indelible scripts of his history and profile to savor his time at the phenomenal Ikeja Bar as Chairman where he was tasked with standing alongside his progressive likes in strong opposition against military dictatorship with success. Undisputedly, Mr. Adesina (SAN) is capable and ready—more than ready! Therefore, let our votes be ready to roar victoriously because ‘the crown does not just only look good, but looks sparklingly best on Mr. Dele Adesina’s head’. 

Mr. Dele Adesina’s overtures are well spelt out in beams of bright sparkling light under the administration of esteemed Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) as NBA President. There are many positive impacts to highlight. Is it in respect of the establishment and support of diversity and specialization? Or, is it with regard to the focus on seeing to the rising of the standard of legal education by direct investment in form of four law schools (as it then existed)? TAKE NOTE, as a matter of profound and indelible legacy, that Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) was part of the team that secured the establishment of NBA as a body with juristic personality and perpetual succession in 2002. What is more, he was part of the team that established the stamp and seal policy to check the invasion of fake lawyers and to promote professionalism. Being part of the above listed success trains is further proof of his overtures towards keeping and maintaining a vision – OF SECURTY. There is so much more on the score cards of experience which drum thunderously in Mr. Dele Adesina’s favor. His candidature is such a massive swagger ginger to the mind which seeks genuine and realistic progress of the Bar. Hence; absolutely—and without doubt, “the crown does not just only look good, but looks sparklingly best on Mr. Dele Adesina’s head”. 

Dexterous on the flanks of intellectual writing, Mr. Adesina has shed very intensely luminous rays of light through his publications and lectures on vital issues concerning law and the legal profession. The count of these works is over two score (40+) within and outside Nigeria. Attentively glazing into his vision which is driven by “visionary, selfless and exemplary leadership”, one is drawn towards his profile and mission statement wherein no self seeking engineered propaganda is visible. Visible on all fronts are facts which sound loud in his vision statement. Mr. Adesina’s works, journey, and sacrifice, speak for him in thunderously vociferous magnitude; yet, calm in consistency of impact and wowing impression, like sweetly scented breeze of a flowery garden. As a matter of fact and no figment of fantasilized imagination,   Mr. Adesina (SAN) is WELL INFORMED about the association which he presently aspires to lead. His standing is pure ASSURANCE. His candidature is the REAL DEAL! Once again, reiteratively speaking, ‘the crown does not just look good, but looks sparklingly best on Mr. Dele Adesina’s head.

The promised destination of consolidated glory is at hand for the Nigerian Bar Association with Mr. Dele Adesina as the National President. This is a central awareness of a multitude of highly esteemed lawyers from Gracious Silks to New Wigs, who have chosen to add their voices to support Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) in campaign. The graceful multitude, known as TEAM DASAN (DELE-ADESINA-SAN) and publicly marshaled by Mr. Adesina Adegbite (Former National Welfare Secretary of the NBA), have been a spectacular propeller—blazing indefatigably with blistering momentum, boisterous glee, contiguous optimism, inviolable harmony, and an apparently indestructible spirit of progression towards a golden goal.

The high powered team DASAN train is endowed with a limitless expansive space to accommodate as many as would like to support the great course of progression into a better secured future of the Bar. For those who have not yet come on board DASAN EXPRESS, cast away all doubts concerning Mr. Dele Adesina’s candidature, take a decision for DASAN (if you have not done so), reflect deeply and resolve to align with  Mr. Adesina’s aspiration. VOTE RIGHT! Your vote is your power to empower the best and contribute to the consolidated future security and greatness of the highly esteemed Nigerian Bar Association.

All along in the NBA, Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) has been there, serving meritoriously. Obviously, he is very fit to be the next President of NBA. As for those who are buying a misconception that Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) is riding on a tribal chariot, please think twice and CAST AWAY such misleading misconception as they come your way. Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) is a bar man of exquisite open mindedness and humane grandeur—further finely defined in Spanish letters’ construct as DASAN El Magnifico! To the Young Lawyers, because you are the FUTURE, it is most beneficial that you observe scales of ‘experience’ and ‘service value’ in the history of the NBA administration as you choose whom to vote for. Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) is a perfect example of a leader to support and follow. On a concluding note, I strongly affirm that there was never, and there is not, A SINGLE DOUBT: ‘the crown does not just only look good, but LOOKS SPARKLINGLY BEST ON DELE ADESHINA’S HEAD!’.

Preceding the onset
of colonialism and subsequent introduction of English-type courts by the
British, the concept of Law, settlement of dispute, or conflict resolution and
justice was not unknown to what was to become Nigeria (1). 

Before the fusion of the Southern and Northern territories in 1914, the territories consisted of politically and legally independent tribes which had set-in-place mechanisms for addressing conflicts, such as mediation, adjudication, reconciliation, and negotiation as well as cross examination, which offered great prospects for peaceful co-existence and harmonious relationships post-conflict than the modern method of litigation settlements in law courts (2). The English Legal System was introduced first to
the Lagos colony of Nigeria in 1863. Pursuant to Section 71 the Supreme Court Ordinance
of 1876, a person could only qualify to practice law in Nigeria if they
have been called to bar or admitted as solicitors in England, Scotland or Ireland
(3). 

Christopher Alexander
Sapara Williams was the first qualified indigenous lawyer called to the English
bar in 1879, he later became Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association in 1900.
Although this was prior to the formal establishment of the Nigerian Bar
Association, history has it that lawyers in Nigeria had already been organizing
themselves and holding meetings periodically to deliberate on issues or matters
of interest and matters pertaining to the legal profession (4).
The Legal Profession is one of the oldest professions in modern Nigeria (5).

Although legal
practice in Nigeria dates as far back as the 19^th century, it was
only until about five decades ago, precisely 1959, that the Nigerian Bar
Association (NBA) came into being (6).
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) is the non-profit, umbrella professional
association for all lawyers who complete and meet all the licensing
requirements for admission to the Bar in Nigeria. The Nigerian Bar Association
has 125 active branches across the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory
of Nigeria. The current president of the Nigerian Bar Association is Paul
Usoro, SAN. 

Below is a list of
chairmen of the Nigerian Bar Association before 1959:

The decision to align with the candidature of Dele Adesina, SAN was reached by the leaders and members of the three branches numbered over 200 in attendance in a joint meeting held at Citi Hub Event Center, Abakaliki.

According to Messrs Ogbonnaya Okorie, Michael Odi Njoku and Uchenna Collins Igba who are chairmen of Abakaliki, Afikpo and Onueke branches respectively, the above decision was informed by the sterling track records of the learned Silk, the wealth of knowledge and experience he acquired in various leadership roles he has played for the progress of the bar.

Another reason is that the emergence of Dele Adesina, SAN who is the adopted candidate of Egbe Amofin (umbrella body of Yoruba lawyers) will ensure equity and fairness vis a vis the zoning formula provided in the NBA Constitution, 2015 (as amended).

The joint meeting of Ebonyi Bar is the first of its kind and was well attended by the leaders and members of the three branches.

Among the leaders who attended the meeting include Mr. Emeka Anosike (National Financial Secretary of NBA), Mr. R.O Umahi Nweze, Chief Goddy Ogbaga (former Minister of State for Power and Steel), Mazi Eziaku Eze ( former chairman, Abakaliki Branch of NBA), Chief Stanley Nkaa (former Chairman, Afikpo Branch of NBA), Mr. Festus Nweke, JP (former chairman, Abakaliki Branch of NBA) among other senior members and stakeholders of the three branches.

The motion to align with the candidature of Dele Adesina, SAN as a sole candidate for the position of the President was moved by Mr. Emeka Odom, Secretary, Onueke Branch and seconded by Mr. C.I Okwor of Abakaliki Branch before it was adopted by the overwhelming members of the three NBA branches in Ebonyi State.

In their remarks, the chairman of Abakaliki, Ogbonnaya Okorie, the chairman of Afikpo, Sir Michael Odi Njoku and the chairman of Onueke branch, Colins Uchenna Igba, urged members who were yet to verify their data on NBA portal to do so to enable them massively vote for their candidate.

1. Ogbonnaya Okorie, Chairman and Nnaemeka Nwambam,
Secretary, Abakaliki Branch.

2. Sir Michael Odi Njoku, Chairman and Samuel Egwu Ohia,
Secretary, Afikpo Branch.

3. Colins Uchenna Igba, Chairman and Emeka Odom,
Secretary, Onueke Branch.