The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has dismissed the directives issued by the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) who demanded the postponement of the planned election of the association’s National Officers.
Fagbemi was alleged to have, in a report by a sub-committee, demanded the postponement of the election and disbandment of the NBA’s Electoral Committee.
The AGF was also claimed to have directed the termination of the appointment of the current service provider because he is a sole proprietor and the appointment of a new service provider.
Other directives in the report linked to the AGF was the incorporation of National Identification Number (NIN) in the data of voters in the conduct of the NBA Election and the recalibration of the NBA Constitution to take away universal suffrage.
Reacting in a statement issued on Tuesday, the NBA President, Afam Osigwe, argued that the AGF cannot give such directives as the association is an independent body and not under his control.
Osigwe claimed that the directives are similar to the reliefs sought in the two cases filed against the association by a factional group, Egbe Amofin.
“The Nigerian Bar Association believes that the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation could not issue the said directive as it is entirely unconstitutional, ultra vires the powers of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation, and an attempt to bring the Nigerian Bar Association under the control of the office of the Honourable Attorney General.
“For the record, the Nigerian Bar Association is an independent body not under the control of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation.
“By the provisions of section 10(2) of the Legal Practitioners Act, the only time a body distinct from the Nigerian Bar Association is empowered to interfere in the activities of the Nigerian Bar Association is stated clearly therein and none of the events have occurred as to entitle the Honourable Attorney General to take the position stated in the purported directive.
“We are strengthened in our belief that the Honourable Attorney General could not have given the purported directives when in fact the purported directives are no different from the reliefs sought in the two Egbe Amofin Cases pending at the High Court of Oyo State.
“Indeed, the Honourable Attorney General cannot grant reliefs sought in the two Egbe Amofin suits in his capacity as a convener of a mediation meeting or even as the Chief Law Officer of the Federation.
“The Honourable Attorney General is at best a party/mediator, and it is settled that a mediator does not give directives to the parties in a matter in which he is a party.” The NBA President wrote.
While demanding the withdrawal of cases, Osigwe clarified that the sub-committee set to up to resolve the issue between the NBA and the Egbe Amofin cannot intervene in the planned election.
“It was therefore the decision of the attendees of the meeting that the Sub-Committee set up is to ONLY liaise with the contending parties for the purpose of overseeing the withdrawal of the actions.
“The Sub-Committee was never empowered to make any inquest as to the conduct of the President of the Nigerian Bar Association to the extent of making far-reaching condemnations against him when he is not a candidate in the election.
“Their reliance on the memos submitted by some candidates as the basis for those findings violates the constitutional safeguard of fair hearing as the President was never served with those memos to enable him make a response before such condemnations were made, assuming he was a necessary person to appear before the Sub-Committee.” He said.
The NBA President also faulted the appointment of Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), considered to be one of the plaintiffs in the suit filed against the NBA, as the chairman of the sub-committee.
“If the Sub-Committee were empowered to review the issues contained in the report, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, who is the proponent of the cases of the plaintiffs, cannot chair such a Sub-Committee as he is clearly biased and has lost any neutrality to enable a Sub-Committee chaired by him to propose a resolution to these cases.
“There is no way the Nigerian Bar Association would have agreed that a person who is biased over one of the parties should head any committee considering his partisan role in the entire matter.
“This report, which is said to have been purportedly accepted by the Honourable Attorney General, is unacceptable owing to its source.” He wrote.
Osigwe reiterated that the report of the sub-committee containing the purported directives of the AGF is bias and beyond the committee’s remit.
He reaffirmed that the NBA election will be held as planned.
“The NBA National Officers’ electoral process shall continue as scheduled by the ECNBA.
“The Nigerian Bar Association attended the meeting convened by the Honourable Attorney General as a Co-Respondent with the aim of an amicable resolution of the lawsuit commenced by Egbe Amofin giving rise to Appeal No. CA/IB/110/2026 between Aham Ejelam, SAN & 4 Ors v. Ibrahim Lawal & 7 Ors.
“Suggested resolutions in a meeting seeking to resolve a dispute already before the Court can only be considered binding on the parties if all the parties accept same and cannot in any guise be termed a directive that must willy-nilly be accepted by the parties in the matter.
“At no time was the Honourable Attorney General empowered to issue directives that are capable of truncating the democratic succession process of the NBA or even suggest a “recalibration” of the NBA Constitution.” Osigwe wrote.
He further noted that the report alleging the directives was issued by Fagbemi is not contained on the official letterhead of the AGF, adding that the NBA is not in receipt of any communication from his office.