Respectfully, I wish to react to the paragraphs of the allegations, conclusions and unmeritorious claims made by the author of this script or letter.
Paragraph 1 talks about Civil Servants. There are code of conducts guiding the discipline of civil servants and also some employees of notable organizations,  and same varies with respect to their peculiar circumstances. The NBA President is not a Civil Servant neither is he an employee, also he hasn’t breached any provision of the Constitution guiding the Profession. Neither is he found wanting as regards the purported charge framed by the anti-graft body nor is he found wanting based on his official capacity as the NBA President.  I refer you to the NBA Constitution  and also the Civil  Service Rule of each State and that of the whole Federation, whichever is applicable.
Paragraph 2 and 3 talks about the statement made by the past NBA President as regards the trial of Judges when the DSS raided them unlawfully. Well, it’s so sad to know and note that the author of this content I am responding to clearly is misguided or confused as to the circumstances warranting such statement. More so while it might be true the past NBA President released a statement that the Judges step aside, it’s also interesting to note that majority of lawyers frowned at that. The Google search engine has numerous posts as regards this. It might also be interesting to note at this juncture that assuming without conceding that the Judges were made to step aside during this period and still continue with their position, the position of the NBA President is an ELECTIVE POSITION AND NOT ONE BY APPOINTMENT. There are laid down procedures and provisions when any one seen aggrieved about a matter or situation to elective office holders. E.G we have Donald Trump,  a Parliamentarian in the UK recently who was sentenced but still holds the position of being in the parliament, we have President Buhari who was alleged, sued as regards  some baseless allegation and so on. Like our Courts will say, each case should be decided on the strength of its own peculiarity. So dear Carol, you goofed because the false allegation you are relying on does not stem from MR USORO SAN actions or inactions as the President of the Bar. The allegation against judges were in connection with their Judicial function as Judges.
Paragraph 4 talks about an obiter dictum and I will humbly refer the writer to the following decided authorities; ODUNUKURE v. OFOMATA & ANOR (2010) LPELR-2250(SC)
“An obiter dictum is a statement made in passing which does not reflect the ratio deidendi, that is the reasoning or ground upon which a case is decided.” Per ADEKEYE, J.S.C (P. 48, para. A)case is decided.” Per ADEKEYE, J.S.C (P. 48, para. A) also in the decided case of EYO & ORS. v. OKPA & ANOR. “A comment or statement of the court, which is not necessary for the determination of the issues joined in the parties’ pleadings, is an obiter dictum. It has no binding authority and cannot be subject of an appeal. See: Wilson vs. Osin (1998) 4 NWLR (Pt. 88) 324; Buhari vs. Obasanjo (2005) 13 NWLR (Pt. 941) 1; Saude vs Abdullahi ( 1989) 4 NWLR (Pt. 116) 387; Ngige vs. Obi (2006) 14 NWLR (Pt. 979). The word ‘Obiter’ simply means in passing, incidental or cursory. See: Mohammed vs. Lawal (2006) 9 NWLR (Pt. 985) 400”. Per OMOKRI, J.C.A. (P. 33, paras. A-C) Other cases are; Wilson vs. Osin (1998) 4 NWLR (Pt. 88) 324. I am further emboldened by the case of OROK v. THE STATE (2009) LPELR-8271(CA) where the Court held that “The 6th Edition of the Black’s Law Dictionary at page 1072 explains obiter dictim as “words of an opinion entirely unnecessary for the decision of the case. Noel vs. Olds 78 U.S. App. D.C 155, 138 F. 2d. 501, 588. A remark made, or opinion expressed by a Judge in his decision upon a cause, “by the way” that is incidentally or collaterally and not directly upon the question before him, or upon a point not necessarily involved in the determination of the cause, or introduced by way of illustration, or analogy or argument. Such are not binding as precedent. By virtue and reliance on the above case, it can be said and safely concluded that Carol has seriously goofed and no law or statute can support her unmeritorious allegations.
Paragraph 5 of the content is very malicious in nature. The Usoros have been directly and indirectly involved in the growth of the profession. If not for the Usoros, I’m sure the author would not have the privilege of enjoying the GSM today. Thanks to the amiable leads drafts man of the communication laws in our country MR. USORO SAN, and to his wife who has also served in numerous ways that I would list richly as I respond in this paragraph. The most recent involved is the 2017 NBA Conference which is still one or even the best till date, and the Usoros were actively involved. Paul is a committed and active member of the NBA and the International Bar Association.   Member of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the NBA. Mr Usoro has been a NEC member under the Presidency of: o Chief Bayo Ojo SAN; o J.B. Daudu SAN; o Okey Wali SAN; o Augustine Alegeh SAN;  Member of the NBA Legal Profession Regulation Review Committee.   Paul was the pioneer Chairman of the Communications Committee of the NBA Section of Business Law (SBL).   He attends most NBA Annual General Meetings and National Executive Committee (NEC) Meetings.   In 2017, Paul attended the NBA Legal mission to the UK Bar Standard Commission and Solicitors Regulatory Authority to understudy their system.  Paul fully sponsored the Elders Night of NBA Lagos Branch 2017 Law week and routinely sponsors Lagos Bar events.   Pauls Firm was the sole sponsor of one of the most attended Break-out sessions at the 2017 NBA Conference: Emerging Trends in Global Legal Practice. PUC paid for travel costs of the four (4) foreign speakers who made presentations at the session.   Paul hosted delegates to NBA NEC Meeting held in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State in November, 2017.  Pauls participation in the Planning Committee for the NBA NEC Meeting in Uyo was pivotal to the resounding success of the November 2017 NEC Meeting.   Paul hosted NBA NEC members and senior lawyers in Uyo, Akwa-Ibom State in November 2014 and responds positively whenever requested to sponsor and/or participate in Akwa Ibom and Cross River States Bar activities.  Supported by Paul, PUC is actively involved in the sponsorship of SBL activities.  The Firm produced the Chairman of the SBL between 2010 and 2011, with the total support of Paul Usoro, SAN.   Paul hosted Cross River and Akwa Ibom delegates to the NBA Annual General Meeting held in Lagos in 2009.  PUC regularly pays annual practicing fees and branch dues for its over thirty-five lawyers.   Paul has presented several papers at NBA programs, using the platform to share knowledge with old and young lawyers. 
There is no gain saying that the author of the content I am responding to is only bitter because she felt having supported the president of the bar during the elections, she is entitled to some privileges, which is wrong and not sportsmanly. I hereby advise Carol to stop trading lies, desist from further acts of unethical and unprofessional attitude, as same is unbecoming of a legal practitioner. Bearing in mind that she has already breached the RPC, LPA and liable to face disciplinary actions of the noble profession. (it is also on record that the regime of Okey Wali set up a disciplinary commitee to look into the activities and or breach of Carol, she knew what she faced and how she went about begging). This paragraph clearly shows to the world that you (Carol) never read the published profile of the candidate you claim to have supported. You are just out engaging in deliberate falsehood.
Paragraph 6 unfortunately isn’t the true picture. The Judges have their code of conduct. The NJC didn’t take such action only on the basis that a help was rendered to a childhood friend in need. A friend who hasn’t sat on any of the alleged presidents case at all. The records are there. Just bitter politics and the said author is someone who has never won elections in the bar because of this same irrational attitude, all the 5 times she contested. I also put it to her to present her practice fees for the past 3 years and branch dues. She has no locus and she is also in breach of the rules of professional conduct.  She should be totally disregarded just as serious minded lawyers have done knowing this style of hers as a reputation taken into account. No one pays heed to her rants which has been meted out to several past presidents
Long live the NBA.
Olajide Abiodun Esq.