The Nigerian Bar Association Section on Legal Practice (NBA-SLP) Litigation Committee recently hosted a comprehensive webinar titled “The Advertisement Conundrum”, addressing the intricacies of legal advertising under Rule 39 of the Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC).

The event, held on Thursday, February 13, 2025,, brought together distinguished legal experts to explore the ethical boundaries of legal advertising, the transformative role of technology, and the urgent need for reforms in Nigeria’s legal practice.

The webinar, moderated by Bayo Omole, featured a panel of esteemed legal minds, including Professor Ernest Ojukwu, SAN, a key architect of the current RPC; Dr. Tahir Hamid, a legal ethics expert from the Nigerian Law School; and Marcus Fernandez, a tech law enthusiast and Senior Special Assistant to the Attorney General.

1. Historical Context and Evolution of Rule 39

Professor Ernest Ojukwu, SAN, provided a detailed historical background of Rule 39, explaining that the 2007 RPC was a significant improvement over the 1975 rules. He noted that while the 1975 rules largely prohibited advertising, the 2007 RPC introduced limited allowances for advertising, provided it was fair, accurate, and not misleading.

  • Prohibitions Under Rule 39:
    • Lawyers cannot make statements about the quality of their work, the size of their practice, or their success rates.
    • Solicitation of clients, either directly or indirectly, is strictly prohibited.
    • Advertising must not be frequent, annoying, or self-aggrandizing.

Professor Ojukwu emphasized that the current rules were designed to balance the need for lawyers to promote their services with the need to maintain the dignity and integrity of the legal profession. However, he acknowledged that the rules are outdated and do not adequately address modern advertising methods, such as social media and virtual law practices.

2. The Role of Technology in Legal Advertising

Marcus Fernandez delved into the impact of technology on legal advertising, noting that the RPC, drafted in 2007, did not anticipate the rise of social media, virtual law firms, and online marketing. He highlighted several key points:

  • Virtual Law Firms:
    Fernandez explained that virtual law firms are now a reality, with many lawyers operating entirely online. He noted that while the RPC does not explicitly address virtual practices, lawyers must still adhere to ethical standards when advertising their services online.
  • Social Media and Metadata:
    He cautioned against using metadata or paid ads to claim superiority, such as labeling oneself as the “best lawyer” in a particular field. Such practices, he argued, could violate Rule 39.
  • Webinars and Online Events:
    Fernandez emphasized that hosting webinars or publishing articles on legal topics is a permissible form of advertising, provided it does not cross into solicitation or self-promotion.

3. Challenges for Young Lawyers

Dr. Tahir Hamid addressed the struggles faced by young lawyers in navigating the advertising rules. He noted that many new lawyers feel disadvantaged compared to established firms, which often have greater resources and name recognition.

  • Ethical Training Beyond Law School:
    Dr. Hamid stressed the importance of ongoing ethical training for lawyers, particularly in understanding the nuances of Rule 39. He revealed that while the Nigerian Law School teaches professional ethics, many lawyers fail to retain or apply this knowledge in practice.
  • Misinterpretation of Rules:
    He highlighted that some senior lawyers intimidate younger practitioners by misinterpreting the rules, leading to unnecessary restrictions on advertising.

4. Proposed Reforms and Simplification of the RPC

Panelists unanimously agreed that the current RPC needs to be simplified and modernized to reflect the realities of today’s digital age. Professor Ojukwu revealed that a new draft of the RPC is already in the works, with the aim of providing clearer guidelines on advertising and technology use.

  • Key Areas for Reform:
    • Clarifying what constitutes permissible advertising versus solicitation.
    • Addressing the use of social media, virtual law firms, and online marketing.
    • Establishing a regulatory body to review and approve advertisements before publication.

Audience Engagement and Poll Results

The webinar featured live polls, allowing participants to share their views on key issues. The results revealed:

  • Restrictive Advertising Regime:
    A majority of participants agreed that the current advertising rules are too restrictive and disproportionately affect new lawyers.
  • Trial Publicity:
    Participants were divided on whether trial publicity constitutes advertising, with some arguing that it is a necessary tool for transparency and others cautioning against its potential to prejudice ongoing cases.
  • Client Testimonials:
    Many participants believed that client testimonials should be allowed, provided they are accurate and not misleading.

Practical Scenarios and Case Studies

The panelists also addressed practical scenarios to illustrate the application of Rule 39:

  • Distributing Business Cards at Social Events:
    Professor Ojukwu and Fernandez agreed that distributing business cards at social events is permissible, provided it is done discreetly and without solicitation.
  • Publishing Case Outcomes on Social Media:
    Panelists cautioned against publishing detailed case outcomes on social media, as this could be interpreted as self-aggrandizement or misleading advertising.
  • Unsolicited Proposals to Potential Clients:
    Fernandez clarified that sending unsolicited proposals to potential clients is a violation of Rule 39, as it constitutes solicitation.

The webinar concluded with a call for continuous education and ethical adherence within the legal profession. Panelists urged lawyers to leverage technology responsibly while maintaining the dignity of the profession.