The President of the Nigerian Bar Association,NBA, Paul Usoro, SAN has, in preparations for the 60th Annual General Conference of the NBA, duly constituted the Technical Committee on Conference Planning, TCCP.

Lawyers who participated at the last conference will agree that it was one of a kind and one of the best Conferences ever. 

Full list of persons on the TCCP include – 

-Prof Konyinsola Ajayi, SAN M Chairman

– George Etomi M Member
– Uche Obi, SAN M Member
– Sani Hussaini Garun-Gabbas, SAN M Member
– Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya F Member
– Mfon Usoro F Member
– Ayotola Jagun F Member
– Sule Shu’aibu M Member
– Chukwuka Ikwuazom M Member
– Chinyere Okorocha F Member
– Akin Ajibola M Member
– Toyosi Alabi F Member
– Kelechi Obi M Member
– Adetola Bucknor-Taiwo F Member
– Hannatu Dauda Simon F Member
– Sylvester Udemezue M Member
– Tosin Iyayi F Member
– Yusuf Abdullahi Abdulkadir M LOAN Chairman
– Oludayo Olorunfemi F Ikere-Ekiti Chairperson
– Dr. Paul Ebiala M Calabar Chairman
– Mohammed A I Akande M Ilorin Chairman
– Paschal Ugwuanyi M Nnewi Chairman
– Sylvester Adaka M Port Harcourt Chairman
– Seni Adio, SAN M SBL Chairman
– Oluseun Abimbola M SPL Chairman
– Dr. Paul Ananaba, SAN M SPIDEL Chairman
– Prof Oluyemisi Bamgbose, SAN F NBA WF Chairperson
– Tobi Adebowale M President, YLF Council
– Banke Olagbegi-Oloba F National Treasurer
– Joshua Usman M National Welfare Secretary
– Kunle Edun M National Publicity Secretary
– Asue Ighodalo M Consultant
– Gbenga Oyebode, MFR M Consultant

The Nigerian Bar Association Women Forum (NBAWF) through its Mentorship Committee has developed a mentorship programme for members. The programme offers free mentoring for young female lawyers from 0-5 years at the bar. NBAWF mentoring is intended to encourage and assist members to develop to their full potentials in all areas of career and life and will be held at different locations in the country. In designing this programme, we plan to incorporate areas of concern to you prior to the rollout. 

The NBAWF invites interested female lawyers within the 0-5 year bracket to share suggestions, mentorship needs and contact details including Bar Branch with the Secretary at ugo.esq@gmail.com or on NBAWF social media handles. Senior female lawyers interested and willing to inspire younger female lawyers as mentors are requested to send their contact details to  ugo.esq@gmail.com. The window for this consultation is two weeks ending on 7 February 2020.

Follow us on:
FB – NBA WOMEN FORUM
TWITTER – @ForumNba
LinkedIn – NBA WOMEN FORUM

Let’s work together to Empower Female Lawyers.

Following the sequence of insecurity in the South West, on the 5th day of May, 2019, there was an abduction of a lecturer of Obafemi Awolowo University, Professor Olayinka Adegbehingbe at the Ikoyi/Apomu junction of the Ife/Ibadan expressway of Oyo State. Also, on the 13th day of July, 2019, there was a report that gunmen who were suspected to be herdsmen killed Funke Olakunrin, a daughter of the Afenifere leader on the Ondo-Ore road. On the 2nd day of August, 2019, a pastor of the Redeemed Christian Church of God and four others were kidnapped at the Ogbere area of Ogun State. These incidents among others gave birth to Operation Amotekun.
Reactions have however trailed the inauguration from certain quarters that choose to name the security outfit as illegal. These reactions include threat from the Miyetti Allah Organisation to deny south west of the 2023 Presidential seat as well as terming the outfit as a possible disaster for Nigeria. 

The Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN similarly declared the security initiative as illegal relying on the position that the power over security is an exclusive duty of the Federal Government.

In the midst of the comments parading the Amotekun initiative, its pronouncement as illegal and the occasioned counter arguments, it becomes extremely instructive to make recourse to the law for the determination of its legality or otherwise.

The primary provision of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria relating to government and security is Section 14 (2) (b) which provides, “the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.” Flowing from the provision, it become worthy to acknowledge that security is a responsibility of the government and any government that fails in providing security for its people has failed a statutory obligation and it follows quickly that the event of the failure of the government will open doors for citizens to make productive steps to secure themselves. A clear study of Section 14 (2) (b) speaks of government generally whether Federal, State or Local Government.

The antagonists of the Operation Amotekun initiative have argued that the initiative is unnecessary owing to the constitutional recognition of the Nigerian Police Force. However, Section 214 CFRN which establishes the Nigeria Police Force, provides, “there shall be a police Force for Nigeria, which shall be known as the Nigerian Police Force, and subject to the provisions of this section no other police force shall be established for the Federation or any part thereof.” By this provision, the constitution merely established the Nigeria Police without spelling out in clear terms their functions or their exclusivity in criminal or security matters. 

Section 4 of the Police Act however did a deep illumination into the functions of the Nigerian Police Force. It provides, ‘the police shall be employed for the prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of offenders, the preservation of law and order, the protection of life and property and the due enforcement of all laws and regulations with which they are directly charged…’ By interpretation, the law did not in any part make the security of lives and property the exclusive duty of the Nigeria Police to the exclusion of any other entity. From Section 214 CFRN, it becomes clear that any state or local government can establish any entity in their bid to comply with the security obligations of Section 14 (2) (b).

From the above statutory directives, it is clear that Operation Amotekun is not illegal by any constitutional directive. The pronouncement of the Attorney General of the Federation of Operation Amotekun as illegal therefore is lacking force as the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation created by Section 150 CFRN does not have the power conferred to the courtroom under Chapter VII of the constitution.
In the instance of any confusion, it is instructive that the Attorney General of the Federation should approach the Supreme Court which is constitutionally robed with an original jurisdiction over this matter.

Pending the predictable pronouncement of the Supreme Court, Operation Amotekun has the presumption of legality and should be given all the supports needed to achieve its overall objectives.

Daniel O. Adedigba
adedigbadaniel01@gmail.com
08108019481

A few days ago, I read a few commentaries which were so laden with crocodile tears that I thought it necessary to write and provide this ‘mop’ to wipe our floor clean again. For context, I have reproduced two of those commentaries below:

“The entire Nigerian political and moral systems are deteriorating fast and sickening. The forthcoming NBA national elections and intrigues by some aspirants are shameful and condemnable by morally upright lawyers. Does it mean that our conscience as a noble profession is lost? Are we getting so gullible to be bought by free dinners and concerts? Trying to buy our votes through dubious and messy programmes is silly. NBA should not get into the arena of the obvious moral decadent political system of the country. This emerging morally bankrupt programmes by aspirants should be condemned by all well-meaning lawyers. If we fail to raise the wise alarm now, it will get to actual vote buying with cash as it is with the present election system in the country. Let’s all rise up against the morally bankrupt agenda of corrupt minds from taking over our national body (NBA) through dubious means.” [sic]

“When we make excuses for what is ethically unacceptable in the legal profession, I weep for our once noble profession. In the forthcoming NBA election, we as lawyers must make a distinction between those who are ready to serve and those who believe our votes can be bought by giving us appearance of being nice. Those who have not been greeting us or praying for us on social media before will start doing so now. Those who never care to pay practising fees for young lawyers will suddenly start to do so now. Those who never attend or organise social functions for lawyers, will start doing so now. Those who have nothing to offer the profession in terms of brevity and speaking out against the declining ethnic in the profession are now doing so. Those whose conduct fall far below the expected standards of conduct will be pontificating now as messiah of the Bar. We are descending to so low standard of conduct in the conduct of our election that I really don’t see the difference between our NBA election and the conventional politics in Nigeria. As lawyers we must avoid giving appearance of impropriety in our quest to occupy any post in NBA. Time has come for us as lawyers to respect our rules of professional conduct in the legal profession if we want the society to take us serious. This is what is on my mind today.” [sic]

I have refrained from producing the names of the persons who made these comments simply to protect them from the backlash of their own myopia and amnesia, details of which are discussed below. As a preliminary point, I must confess that I am tempted to respond generously to the commentators’ confusing reference to moral standards when the NBA’s 2015 Constitution as amended (the “Constitution”) clearly specifies what amounts to legally permissible electoral conduct. I must also confess that I am going to fall into that temptation with joy! So far, and to the best of my knowledge, none of the aspirants appears to have breached the electoral provisions in the Constitution, and all their conducts are legally permitted. Importing morality, without more, into this is therefore a cheap attempt to muddy otherwise clear waters, especially in the face of the highly elusive and relativist nature of morality.

What the first commentator considers as moral may be deemed immoral by someone else. So, the first commentator has no standing to declare what may amount to morally acceptable standards, or what may comprise a moral system, or who may qualify as a morally upright lawyer. Having said the above, I must state that I am not incurably positivist. Neither am I incurably naturalist. I understand the normativity of law, I understand the normativity of morality, and like Devlin and Paton, I also appreciate the moral content of law. In this respect, we should only raise questions of morality if we can show that they comprise the moral content of clear provisions of law, but the first commentator woefully failed to do that.

Interestingly, the Austin Alegeh administration and the writers of the Constitution also appreciate the moral content of law and that was why they instituted universal suffrage and electronic voting. These were designed and introduced to eliminate the highly corrupt delegate voting system through which NBA leaders were ‘selected’ in the past. I am therefore shocked by the commentators’ amnesia. They appear to have forgotten the road we travelled before getting to this point. They appear to have forgotten that they were active participants in the previous corrupt system. Permit me to refresh their memory:

When we operated the delegate system, it was an open secret that it was fraught with corruption. Candidates and their cronies had access to the delegate lists, targeted delegates, sequestered them in hotels, paid them monies, and literally bought their votes. It was a disgraceful system that had to be terminated. The commentators and their folk were around when this was going on. They were complicit either directly by monetising votes or indirectly by failing to cry as they are now doing. In fact, a story has been told of a particular candidate in a previous election cycle who had sequestered delegates in a hotel (all-expenses paid) but subsequently lost the election. The report was that the candidate angrily evicted all those delegates from the accommodation immediately he received news of his loss. Well, this is hearsay and I am not reporting it to assert its truth. I am only reporting it to prove that it was said and I heard it. To the readers who were around then and can assert its truth, wink.

Anyone who has knowledge of the previous system must acknowledge that we have made significant progress by instituting universal suffrage and electronic voting. A failure to acknowledge that is clearly a medical case of amnesia. Assuming, but not conceding, that there is any merit in the commentators’ views, how many votes can one person buy under the new system? How many lawyers can one person pay practicing fees for? How may free dinners and concerts can one person sponsor? Assuming there is someone who has that kind of capital to risk, and indeed risks it, can that person micromanage voting as was done during the era of delegate voting? The answer to this last question is clearly in the negative.

Voting, under the new system, is a private matter conducted in the comfort of the voter’s home or office. At the end of the day, the voters are free to vote as they please. The allegations of actual or perceived political inducement, therefore, not only fail to make any sense; they also insult the collective nous of the voters, who are all learned people and are capable of taking independent decisions that they consider most favourable for them and their professional association. At the very best, the actions complained about by the commentators would only result in increased voter awareness of the candidacy of particular individuals especially as voters are still free to vote as they please. The commentators’ sudden concern for the conscience of our noble profession is simply bellyaching on account of their loss of control. They want the delegate system back at all costs, so that they can control the elections and make money off it. In fact, at the 2019 Annual General Meeting of the NBA, at least one of the commentators and their cronies were very vociferous in advocating for the re-introduction of the discriminatory, inept and corruption-laden delegate voting system.

As lawyers, we understand what an innuendo is. The commentators’ views are laden with innuendos, and even the blind can see who the target is. This fact, in my view, significantly worsens the commentators’ amnesia and points to their myopia. Only one of the aspirants is known for sponsoring scholarships, capacity-building trainings, NBA Branch meetings, and the likes. This aspirant sees what the future of the profession would be – something which the commentators clearly cannot see. This aspirant has been doing these for at least eight (8) years now, to my knowledge. In all that time, the commentators and their cronies did not describe any of those programmes, sponsorships or scholarships as morally bankrupt, or sickening, or dubious, or any of the other choice adjectives in the commentators’ kitty. The commentators’ moral compasses are suddenly functional simply because it is an election season and this aspirant is gathering the most momentum, to the commentators’ chagrin.

In any event, if the only complaint now is that a particular aspirant took a few people to a concert or to a dinner, then we are doing very well given our recent history. The new system may not be 100% perfect, but it is better than the delegate system by several million light years. The commentators should, therefore, stop complaining about very tangential and irrelevant matters, especially when there is clear evidence showing that the matters complained about predate these elections by several years and are not merely a gimmick. Let us focus on the key issues bedevilling the NBA. Let these campaigns be issue-based. Stop messing the campaign floors up. Save the crocodile tears for something else.

Prince Ifenna J. Okeke

As the general Secretary of the Bar, he moved the leadership of the Bar to mount a sustained protest and demonstration against the then Governor of Anambra State – Chinwoke Mbadinuju after the brutal murder of the then Onitsha Bar Chairman- Barnabas Igwe and the wife. The NBA’s stance on the assassination ensured that Mbadinuju was not returned for 2nd Tenure as the NBA took a stand on that issue.

Again, about two years ago when a Female Lawyer was assaulted by a DPO in Onitsha, Dele Adesina SAN personally brought the issue to the Commissioner of Polici Anambra State and mobilized some senior members of the Onitsha bar to see that justice was done.

Dele Adesina SAN did not just suddenly start showing interest in the affairs of members of the Bar few months/years to contesting for the office of the President of the NBA. He loves the Bar and has the interest of lawyers at heart.

I will rather stand with a man who has been consistent in protecting the interest of lawyers and speaking up against abuse of power and disregard to the rule of law, than with one who suddenly started showing interest in the Bar because he wants to be President. You should too, my learned friend.

Obinna Akpuchukwu (HOD) Esq.

Are you a Nigerian lawyer looking to improve your competence in International Trade Law? Will you like to know the rules that govern cross-border transactions, the international regime for intellectual property registration and become an expert negotiator? 

Then you should register for the International Trade Law and Conflict Management training for lawyers. 


Details include  –

· Theme:  “Lawyers at the center of African Trade”

· Modules:  
– Negotiation & Conflict Management 
– International Arbitration 
– Cross Border Finance 
– International Trade Law
–  Production Sharing Contracts
– Intellectual Property Law


· Date: 30th and 31st of January, 2020 

·Time: 9am – 5pm daily

·Venue: Neca House, Hakeem Balogun Street, Alausa, Ikeja, Lagos.

·Audience: Lawyers

Registration Details

Fee per delegate     – N50,000                                                       

For registration, Please contact Lawlexis on 09095635314; 08055424566 or send a mail to lawlexisinternational@gmail.com.

On 7 January 2020, a member of the Nigerian Bar Association (“NBA” or the “Association”), Jake Okechukwu Effoduh, stirred the hornet’s nest when he tweeted that he had just paid the sum of N15,000 for his Bar practicing fees for the year. He also noted that he has been paying his practicing fees for the past nine (9) years and wondered what the NBA has done for him and the many others who pay these annual fees, statutorily required of all members of the Association.

Rather than overlook the tweet, which understandably went viral and resonated with a number of young lawyers, the tweet gave me cause to pause and truly consider what the NBA does for the thousands of its members, and more importantly, what the NBA can do for its members.

The NBA is the umbrella professional association of all lawyers admitted to practice in Nigeria and as stipulated in the Constitution of the NBA 2015 (as amended), part of the aims and objectives of the Association include the maintenance and defence of the integrity and independence of the Bar and the Judiciary in Nigeria; the promotion and advancement of Legal Education, Continuing Legal Education, Advocacy and Jurisprudence, etc.
The NBA is made up of 125 branches across the country, 3 professional sections, 2 specialised institutes, 3 forums and 8 practice-cadre forums. The National Secretariat of the NBA is managed from the Abuja office and the Association has an organisational structure which consists of a National Executive Committee, a National Officers/Management Board, Sections, Forums, Committees, Working Groups and a National Secretariat. The NBA organises annual conferences in August of every year and holds its general elections to elect its national officers every two years.

As well as the Association has arguably done, there should be no argument that it has not lived up its massive potentials, and can clearly do more. It is for this reason that one cannot but wholeheartedly commend the Lagos Branch of the NBA (aptly christened ‘the Premier Bar’) under the Chairmanship of Mr. Yemi Akangbe for the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) agenda of the Branch. The Premier Bar has in recent times made it a cardinal principle of investing directly in the members of the Branch especially the young lawyers, giving them hope of a better professional future and providing platforms for their upliftment by promoting their social mobility as essential building blocks for the development of the Bar of our dreams.
The Branch has taken up the mantle of the promotion and advancement of Legal Education and Continuing Legal Education in Nigeria and it is one of the few branches in the country, if not the only one, that has a dedicated and focused CPD committee.  This CPD committee has organised many innovative trainings, and mentoring initiatives all of which have been made available to members for free. The committee has had A-list speakers speak on topical issues at each of the last 26 monthly meetings of the Branch; introduced the group/speed mentorship initiative and a 1-1 mentorship programme; coordinated law firm led trainings and other collaborative initiatives. 

This week, the Branch raised the stakes a notch higher when it announced the approval of part sponsorship for 100 members of the Branch (in the sum of Four Million Five Hundred Thousand Naira at Forty-Five Thousand Naira, each) for the Nigerian training element of the CIArb/ NBA collaboration on Associateship certification courses. According to the Chairman of  the CPD Committee of the Branch, Tobenna Erojikwe, the Branch had earlier announced the successful negotiation of a reduction of about 50% of the costs of the training and the sponsorship will go to the first 100 (60 young lawyers and 40 others) members that make the £60 payment for the UK online assessment element of the training. 

We have also been assured that in the coming months, the CPD Committee will be launching the Branch’s Career Development Center and the Law Firm Mentorship Initiative. This is highly commendable and resonates with me as one who is deeply-rooted in such intiatives.

Consistent with the excellent spirit prevalent at the Branch, some private individuals have also taken it upon themselves to sponsor young lawyers to various career development trainings. Indeed, there is currently a Practice Preparation Course organised by ‘Legally Engaged’ and part of the participants are a group of 30 young lawyers drawn from different parts of the country who were fully sponsored to attend by Friends of Olumide Akpata, who has for long been a vanguard of similar capacity building programmes. It is hoped that other well-meaning members of the Bar will key into this crusade and sponsor similar trainings/programmes.

As a business law practitioner and an advocate for specialisation, I call on the young lawyers in the Branch to take advantage of this glorious opportunity. I also call on the NBA Lagos Branch to continue to blaze the trail and for the other branches of the NBA to match or surpass this. Above all, I call on the national body of the NBA to contribute to this discourse so that when next the likes of Jake Okechukwu Effoduh and other well-meaning young lawyers, demand to know what the NBA has done, and can do for them, we can at least point to this and hopefully other achievements.  

Desmond Ogba is member of the NBA Lagos Branch