THE NEW NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (NNBA) AND THE DAWN OF A NEW ERA FOR LEGAL PRACTITIONERS IN NIGERIA- WHY WE SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT OF THE RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT BY THE AGF, MALAMI SAN.
The recent amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (RPC)by the Honourable Attorney General, Abubakar Malami SAN have been greeted with harsh criticisms and backlash from some lawyers across the country.
The NNBA suspects that calls for the repeal of the new gazette signed the President, amending the RPC are sponsored by the same individuals within the legal Profession who want to continue using the self-serving Rules to continue the exploitation and monogamous regime foisted on young lawyers since 2007 when the then AGF, Chief BayoOjo, SAN unilaterally inserted the rules without adequate consultations.
“We the NNBA wish to commend the HAGF for his timely intervention in deleting Rules 9(2), 10, 11, 12 & 13 of the RPC for being exploitative as they equally serve to place more onerous burden on a legal practitioner to prove he is indeed a Legal practitioner even after being called to the Bar and his name inserted in the roll of members at the Supreme Court of Nigeria – Section 2 (1) of the Legal Practitioners Act.
Asides this onerous burden for a legal practitioner to further prove himself to be a legal practitioner, is the issue of commercialization of the stamp and seal which some lawyers have argued is a major source of revenue for the NBA and which was seriously kicked against by lawyers across the country as at that time. So the argument that the removal of these Rules from the RPC would encourage the surge of fake lawyers is rather laughable as the RPC is only meant to regulate the conduct of Lawyers not the layman who would want to impersonate a lawyer. There are laws governing impersonation in the country and yet on several occasions we have witnessed individuals paraded for impersonating a Legal Practitioner even with the stamp and seal introduction.
The introduction of the Practicing Licence by the OlisaAgbokoba led NBA in 2007 would have sufficed for a lawyer after payment of his practicing fee instead of introducing more qualifying rigors like the stamp and seal without which court processes would not be accepted for filling at the courts thereby abridging the constitutional rights of citizens to seek redress by appearing for themselves or be represented by a legal Practitioner of their choice.
The question is, has the NBA since its inception not continued to collect revenues through practicing fee and membership dues? To what use have these fees and dues been deployed into impacting positively on members? And yet every year the NBA holds annual conferences which do not deliver direct benefits to lawyers especially young lawyers. We hold the position that membership of the monogamous NBA should not be mandatory for all Lawyers as the constitution guarantees Freedom of Association and to belong to any association of one’s choice. We believe the time for a NNBA is now and we are solidly on course to gather lawyers especially young lawyers under this umbrella for positive change.
On the contrary the powers conferred on the HAGF by the Legal Practitioners Act is excercisbale by him on behalf of the General Council of the Bar, which he has done like his predecessor in 2007 and any attempt to vilify him, questioning his intellectual capacity and calling for the removal of the silk is highly condemned by us. We welcome this development and stand by him.
We warn that any attempt to undo what has been done would be met with stiff opposition from the NNBA and we shall seek to be joined in all suits against the HAGF.
Signed
E. E. Douglas