By Abdulrasheed Ibrahim, Notary Public

Any serious student of history will confirm that one of the weapons used the African Nationalists against the colonialists in the struggle for independence was the pen to press home their demand for self-determination. The pre-independence era witnessed the springing up of many newspapers that were designed to fight the colonial masters to the standstill and when the hit became too much, the colonialists threw in the towel. The late Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe who eventually became the first post independent Nigeria’s President was the brain behind the Newspaper called the “West African Pilot” ,while the “Tribune Newspaper” of late Chief Obafemi Awolowo (SAN) that survives till date was originally started as a weapon against the colonialism. The assertion used to be “the pen is mightier than the sword” but when the sword became outdated in the art of warfare, the assertion transformed to “the pen is mightier than gun” because the pen has the capacity to achieve within a very short time what the gun cannot achieve in a long while. What is the relevance of the NBA Constitution in the talk about pen, sword and gun? Are the members of the legal profession preparing for warfare? Some people may ask. In reality, members of the profession might not have been seen going about carrying swords and guns as if they are in the state of war but for those that have eyes to see, there have been cold war among lawyers for quite some time now. The cold war against discriminatory provisions in the NBA constitution was not fought in the court of law but was rather fought with pens in the court of public opinion of lawyers. Is there a better way to illustrate this?

Before the coming into force of the 2015 NBA Constitution (now amended once again), the election of the National Officers of the Association used to be by the delegate system but was replaced by the Universal Adult Suffrage or Electronic voting first experimented in 2016 which was not without legal battle in court challenging the outcome of that year NBA Presidential election. After that election, I had observed in an article titled “Sustaining the NBA Revolution” published on 13.9.2016 in the Thisday Newspaper’s LAWYER as follows: “…Without prejudice to the court cases challenging the validity or otherwise of the said election, the decision will be left to our jurists on the bench before whom the cases are pending. The analysis here should not be seen as one trying to subjudice but rather as an analysis examining what makes the said election a unique one after several years of clamour by lawyers for the adoption of Universal Adult Suffrage that enable every lawyer who has paid his bar practicing fee and branch dues to determine the leadership of the association rather than through the old delegate system once described as the “tyranny of minority”.

One of the most difficult set of people to sue is lawyers even if you have a good case against them. Suing a lawyer is like embarking on a journey of no return. It will be easy for a Camel to pass through the eye of a needle than getting judgment against a lawyer. Even when you get judgment against him, except he decides to throw in the towel or accept defeat ,he will still tell you he has the right of appeal against that judgment. Let me cite just two examples to buttress this point. Firstly , Mr. John Austin , a lawyer/journalist who was eventually declared winner on 17th October 2017 by an Abuja High Court as the duly elected National Publicity Secretary after he was in 2016 disqualified by ECNBA when it became apparent that he was going to get the position unopposed .Rather than allowing him to assume office, another lawyer was co-opted (not elected) into that position whose name was made to reflect on the National NBA executive letter headed paper. From the time he was disqualified in 2016 till the judgment came in his favour toward the tail end of the regime he ought to serve with the legal battle was raging on in court. Secondly, when Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama (SAN) challenged the 2016 electronic electoral victory of Mr. Abubakar Mahmud (SAN), the legal battle was also shifted to the court of law and the judgment did not come until the latter had exhausted his 2 years tenure of office.

When I was disqualified in 2018 by the ECNBA from running for the position of National Publicity Secretary on the ground that I was never a NEC member which I appealed against to the same ECNBA that constituted itself contrary to the principle of natural justice as the Appellate Committee that negatively decided the same appeal, I later protested in my article of 8th July 2018 titled: NBA, ECNBA AND THE TYRANNY OF MINORITY:

“….While I have not ruled out completely the possibility of dragging the NBA to the court of law on my disqualification which I still consider unjust, unfair and discriminatory, for now I shall continue to drum it to the hearing of every lawyer and those at the helm of affairs that the NBA must be fully democratized. One of the questions we need to be asking all the candidates in the race now particularly those for the office of NBA President is that: Are they ready to reform or revolutionize the present NBA system?”

From that point I opted for the pen rather than going to the court where some lawyers would want to play to the gallery and be at liberty to be filing unnecessary and frivolous applications to by time and forestall the battle against the numerous discriminations as contained in the NBA Constitution. Since the battle of pen will be well understood by those that claim to be learned and unlearned that would be the best way to go. An attempt was made under Mr. Paul Usoro SAN (PUSAN) to amend that same constitution but that amendment was nothing to write home about despite all the promises of all inclusive bar .The amendment under that regime was more of retaining the George Orwell’s theory rather than seen to the plight of the young lawyers as frankly expressed by one of the young lawyers then by name Zion Ewere Esq. in what he called: AN OPEN LETTER TO PAUL USORO, SAN, where the young lawyer said :

“To my deepest dismay however, in the midst of all steps towards ensuring the betterment and advancement of the NBA, I have discovered that there was and is nothing in thought or plan for the future of the bar , the young lawyers. There has been so many pressing issues and outcry of the young lawyers which I believe you were most abreast and indeed familiar with during your campaign into office .In your pre-election reflections, you mentioned certain reforms you will do to better the system with an inclusive movement, to carry along and fully involve the young lawyers. In the proposed amendment of the NBA constitution 2015, I expected to see the inclusion of even one young lawyer in the NEC, or a proper provision for the welfare and protection of young lawyers from Principals that have exalted themselves to be Alpha and Omega, overworking but underpaying young lawyers whose wages are lesser or equal to peanut sizes. So far in your term ,you have shown little or no interest to young lawyers and it is sad to note that these same young lawyers are to take over with no mentoring and proper upbringing which invariably may continue the cycle, denting the image and reputation with which lawyers hold themselves so highly in the society…”

The amendment done to the NBA Constitution under PUSAN if can be so-called did not have the backing of his entire executive committee talk less of the generality of the NBA because it was an amendment attempted to take the NBA to the stone age rather than to the advance age. According to a prominent member of his executive committee that accused PUSAN of turning the office of the NBA President to that of “Sole Administrator”: “…Little did it surprise anyone that you (PUSAN) sought to include into the recently amended Constitution of the NBA, the clause (which was honourably expunged by members at the AGM of 2019), that persons seeking an election into offices at the Bar should be men and women of ‘mean’!”. Only PUSAN and those pushing for such amendment can explain what they meant by the “men and women of mean”. One must greatly commend those at that AGM of 2019 for throwing such amendment overboard. We have been living in a country where “men and women of mean” have been piloting the affairs of this country , but in all honesty, have those “men and women of mean” developed this country positively to the advantage of the less privilege? By extension, the affairs of the NBA have been under the control of the lawyers with big title for a very long time now under whose regimes other lawyers have been paying annual subscriptions and conference fees through their noses, but could not have anything for free until recently when a man with no big title considers it necessary that lawyer having paid their annual subscription must be at least entitled to free NBA stamp. Is such action not commendable? Will those coming after Olumide Akpata sustain that legacy?

Our opting for pen rather than gun has proved to be very positive and successive in the fight against discrimination in the NBA. If the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can frown at the word “Discrimination”, why must the NBA that prides itself as promoting the Rule of Law encourages that in its Constitution? I once again commend Mr. Olumide Akpata’s NBA leadership for allowing wisdom to prevail by effecting necessary amendment to the NBA Constitution. By the Resolution reached at the conclusion of the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Nigerian Bar Association held on Friday ,October 29, 2021,at the Yakubu Gowon Stadium, Elekahia, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, many things have changed in the NBA Constitution 2015 (as amended). One of the major changes now is that the statutory NEC members is reduced from three (3) to two (2) that is to say the incumbent Chairman and the Secretary of each branch are now NEC members. The position of the NEC representative in most cases used to be reserved for the out-gone branch chairman is expunged from the NBA Constitution. This is indeed a very good development.

Contrary to the 180 co-opted NEC members earlier provided for in the NBA Constitution, the number has now been reduced to 150 co-opted members in the following order: SANs 30 members; Senior members other than SANs who are 25 years post-call 30 members; Active members above 10 but below 24 years post-call 47 members; Special Interest Groups 20 members; Young Lawyers 15 members. It is equally a good thing that this number has been reduced but a thought still needs to be given to making the positions to be elective from the various branches of the NBA rather than mere co-opting by the National Executive Committee to avoid further allegation of the “Sole Administratorship” in the co-opting of members to the National Executive Council (NEC) .

The AGM must be highly commended for throwing overboard the proposal of the Constitutional Review Committee on the abolition of the offices of the Assistant General Secretary and Assistant Publicity Secretary and for resolving that the said offices shall remain in the National Executive Committee of the NBA to ensure inclusiveness of young lawyers in the National Executive Committee meeting, (In view of the fact that they are the only offices in the National Executives Committee that young lawyers are eligible and qualified to aspire to). Another interesting amendment to the Constitution is that “where the Chairman of a Branch refuses to give a letter of good standing to a member for the purposes of elections, the National Executive Committee is authorized to issue said letter to the member if he qualifies for one”, by this development the letter of good standing is no longer the exclusive preserve of any branch chairman who may want to play the role of a godfather.

The provision in the NBA Constitution that has done great injustice to many of us in the NBA politic has now been sent to the grave by the new amendment as follows: “The AGM resolved that the requirement for NEC membership required to contest election be removed for all the national offices except the President, 1st Vice President and the General Secretary.” This is the major victory in the battle of pen against the discrimination in the NBA Constitution. The victory is not only ours but that of the entire generality of lawyers in Nigeria. The gate is now opened to lawyers interested in the race to run in the race in the spirit of sportsmanship. It is very unfortunate and disheartening that the NBA has allowed for quite a while such irrational provision to perpetrate high level of injustice to its members. When you look at the Section 131(d) of the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, what a Nigerian citizen only requires to have educationally to be eligible to contest for the position of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is just to be “educated up to at least School Certificate or its equivalent.” But unfortunately not till this time around, we have had the NBA where a lawyer with his LL.B and BL could not qualify him to contest for a mere ordinary position in the NBA National executives. Is this what decent and responsible politics all about?

With other radical changes that have been brought into the NBA Constitution and politics, one hopes that those who have been going about with their “underground campaigns” to succeed the incumbent NBA Leadership in 2022 will do well to sustain the legacies already put in place by Olumide Akpata’s team. The search and struggling for power should be about serving the people positively and selflessly and not the other way round. May God give victory to those who are upright!

NOTE: Anyone is at liberty to disagree with my above submissions as I will surely appreciate a balanced, fair and objective rebuttal.

08055476823, 08164683735:abdulrasheedibrahim362@gmail.com

21st November 2021

COMING UP NEXT: SHOULD NIGERIANS GIVE UP ON NIGERIA?