NBA GETS 3 MORE BOARD TRUSTEES, NOW 9

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has appointed three new Trustees to join its Board of Trustees. The Trustees are Mr. Yunus Ustaz Usman, SAN (NBA Kaduna Branch); Mr. George Etomi (NBA Lagos Branch) and Patricia Igwebuike (NBA Oji River Branch). This brings to nine the total number of NBA Trustees.

An unimpeachable source told CITY LAWYER that the appointments were proposed and accepted at the pre-Annual General Conference National Executive Council (NEC) Meeting and ratified by the Annual General Meeting (AGM) both of which held in Lagos.

CITY LAWYER reliably gathered that appointment letters have been issued to the new Trustees.

The appointments are in line with Section 24(ii) of the amended NBA Constitution which provides that “The Trustees shall be nine (9) in number and shall be known as THE INCORPORATED TRUSTEES OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION in accordance with the provisions of Part F of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, Act No. 3 2020 (“CAMA” as may be amended from time-to-time). Provided that each geographical zone of the Association as defined in this Constitution shall have an equal number of Trustees.”

Usman was until recently the Chairman of the dissolved NBA Disciplinary Committee. The 15-member committee was set up to investigate complaints of professional impropriety or other misconduct against members of the Bar and to make appropriate recommendations.

Etomi was Chairman of the 12-member Transition Committee which birthed the Olumide Akpata Administration. He was also the pioneer Chairman of NBA Section on Business Law (NBA-SBL). In 2016, Etomi was appointed a member of the Body of Benchers, and is a recipient of the National Productivity Order of Merit Award (NPOM). He is also a member of the International Trade in Legal Services of the Bar Issues Commission of the International Bar Association (IBA) and a regular facilitator at global business conferences.

Igwebuike is currently a Cabinet Member in the Professor Chukwuma Soludo Administration. A former Chairman of NBA Oji River Branch, Igwebuike was a Special Assistant to former Governor Willie Obiano also of Anambra State. She was the Secretary of the recently dissolved NBA General Purposes Committee.

Other members of the Board of Trustees are Dr. Olisa Agbakoba SAN (Chairman), Mr. Joseph Daudu SAN, Mr. Augustine Alegeh SAN, Chief Kanu Agabi SAN, Mrs. Fatima Kwaku, and Mr. Obafemi Adewale.

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

COPYRIGHT 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT: COURT ORDERS SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ON TRUSTEES, AKPATA, OTHERS

The last may not have been heard on the proposed amendment of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Constitution as a High Court sitting in Aba, Abia State has ordered the Claimants in a lawsuit against the amendment to serve the respondents by substituted means.

The respondents are the Incorporated Trustees of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA President Olumide Akpata, suspended General Secretary Joyce Oduah and Acting General Secretary Uche Nwadialo.

The plaintiffs are former NBA Legal Adviser, Mr. Victor Nwaugo and Mr. Onyemaechi Chukwu. The duo had in Suit No. A/207/2022 dragged the respondents to an Abia State High Court over the constitutionality of a proposed amendment of the NBA Constitution at the Annual General Meeting holding on 25th August, 2022 at Eko Atlantic City, Lagos.

In a ruling delivered last Wednesday and made available to CITY LAWYER, Justice Innocent Nwabughogu ordered “That leave be and is hereby granted to the Claimant/Applicant to serve all the Originating Processes and all other processes in this suit on the 2nd–4th Respondents by substituted means by posting them through a reputable courier service company to the office of the 2nd–4th Respondents at Nigerian Bar Association National Secretariat, Plot 1102Mohammadu Buhari way, Cadastral Zone A00, Central Business District Area, Abuja.”

The further court ordered that “Leave is also granted to serve all the Originating Processes and other processes in this suit on the 1st Respondent by method of postal service through a reputable courier service company on its Secretary or any of its Trustees or by handing same over to any of the staff of the 1st Respondent at its National Secretariat at Plot 1102Mohammadu Buhari way, Cadastral Zone A00, Central Business District Area, Abuja.”

Nwaugo told CITY LAWYER that “We sued Incorporated Trustees of NBA, Akpata, Oduah and Nwadialo following notices published on 27th and 28th July 2022 circulating proposed amendment to NBA Constitution. Through our counsel, Ukpai Ukairo Esq, we wrote Akpata & co to withdraw the proposed constitutional amendment for its infractions to Article 25(1) of NBA Constitution, 1999 Constitution, Legal practitioners Act and LPDC Rules.

“We have obtained an Order to serve by substitution. The matter is pending before a High Court of Abia state. We have not applied for an interim or interlocutory Order. We may do that if the need arises.”

The Motion Ex-parte was dated and filed on August 16, 2022 and brought pursuant to Order 7 Rule 6 and Order 39, Rule 1(1) of the Abia State High Court (Procedure) Rules. It was argued by the claimants’ counsel, Mr. C. C. Udoakundu.

The claimants are seeking an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from permitting or allowing any motion for the amendment of the NBA Constitution to be tabled for discussion at the association’s Annual General Meeting.

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

COPYRIGHT 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

MAIKYAU VS OHAZURUIKE: ‘NBA-NEC SEAT VACATED UPON ABSENTEEISM,’ SAYS UDEMEZUE

WHETHER SECTION 8(8) OF THE NBA CONSTITUTION IS SELF-EXECUTING ON LOSS OF NBA-NEC MEMBERSHIP (PART 1)

By Sylvester Udemezue

INTRODUCTION

The present commentary represents my humble, personal opinion on whether or not provisions of section 8(8) of the Constitution of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), 2015 are self-executing.

MEANING OF “SELF-EXECUTING”

According to Cornel University’s Legal Information Institute, self-executing is used to refer to something or a provision that goes into effect or can be enforced after being created without anything else required. In an article titled, “Concept of Self-Executing Provisions”, published by projectjurisprudence, it is stated that a self-executing provision of a law is “a provision which is complete in itself and becomes operative without the aid of supplementary or enabling legislation, or that which supplies sufficient rule by means of which the right it grants may be enjoyed or protected”. Finally, a thing or provision of a law is said to be when it becomes “effective immediately without the need of intervening court action, ancillary legislation, or other type of implementing action” (see: https://law.jrank.org/pages/10130/Self-Executing.html#ixzz7TIgHIUFR)

MEETINGS OF NBA-NEC

Section 8 of the NBA Constitution, 2015 makes provisions for meetings of the National Executive council of the NBA (NBA-NEC). According to section 8 (2) and(4), “The National Executive Council shall meet at least once in a quarter…(4) The President may direct the General Secretary to convene an emergency meeting of the National Executive Council where the situation so demands”. Section 8(6) provides for powers of the NBA-NEC. Meanwhile, membership of the NBA-NEC for a certain period is mandatory for qualification for election into certain national offices of the NBA. Example, section 9(3) dealing with “Qualifications to hold a National Office”, provides:

“A member of the Association shall be qualified to hold a National Office if he/she: a. is a full member of the Association and has paid, as at the date of his/her nomination, his/her Practicing Fees and Branch Dues, as and when due, for three (3) consecutive years inclusive of the year of election; 10 b. with respect to the office of the President, 1st Vice President and General Secretary, is in private legal practice; c. has at any time prior to his/her nomination been a member of the National Executive Council or the Executive Committee of a Branch or Section or Forum as indicated hereunder: i. for contestants for the offices of President, Vice Presidents, and General Secretary – he/she shall have been a member of the National Executive Council for not less than two (2) years at the time of nomination…” (emphasis mine)

AIM OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION

The main purpose of the statutory interpretation is to discover the intentions of the makers of the law. A basic guide towards this end is to assume that the legislature has said in the statute, exactly what it means, and also that it means exactly what it has said therein. Thus, to find the real intentions of the drafters of a statute, regard must be had to the context, subject-matter and object of the statutory provision in question. This is easily achieved “by carefully analyzing the whole scope and provisions of the statute or section relating to the word or phrase under consideration….all approaches to statutory interpretation start (if not necessarily end) with the language and structure of the statute itself. This is because the language and provisions of a statute are the most reliable indicator of the intent of the makers of the statute”. (Udemezue S.C., “Place of Internal and External Aids to Statutory Interpretation in the Light of Legitimateness of Jurisdictive Discretion” (2021) 5 IMSU Journal of International Law and Jurisprudence (IJILJ) 48 (Imo State University). https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Role-of-Internal-and-External-Aids-in-Statutory-A-Udemezue/2a1cb4f1f872da82140420cc0a308d65f5900d57)

INTERPRETATION AND IMPLICATIONS OF S. 8(8) OF THE NBA CONSTITUTION.

Section 8(8) (formerly Section 7(7)) of the NBA Constitution, 2015 provides that “Any member who is absent from three (3) consecutive meetings of the National Executive Committee shall cease to be a member of the National Executive Committee unless he/she shows reasonable cause for such absence to the satisfaction of the National Executive Council.” In my opinion, the necessary implications of section 8(8) of the NBA Constitution is as follows:

1) A Lawyer who is appointed a NEC member and who is absent at NEC meetings on three consecutive occasions, loses his membership of NEC unless there exists a “reasonable cause” for such an absence to the satisfaction of the NEC. I doubt there is any provision for the NEC to institute any hearing at which the said lawyer is expected to make representations for the purposes of determining whether or not the absence is with or without a reasonable cause. I think it is the obligation of the lawyer who knows he’d not be present at a NEC meeting, or who has failed to attend a NEC meeting, to write the NEC and explain why he was going to away or why he stayed away from the meeting. This is in the nature of an application to have his absence excused. Accordingly, if there any evidence that a Lawyer now being accused of having stated away on three consecutive occasions, had written a letter to NEC on any (or all) of such occasions of his absence, either to ask the NEC to excuse his absence or thereafter, to explain his absence, and NEC had then accepted his explanation as satisfactory or a “reasonable cause” for his absence, then the NEC membership of the affected lawyer is saved. Thus, where the lawyer had written the NEC to explain his absence at any NEC meeting or meetings and the NEC had considered such application satisfactory, the implication is that the affected meeting or meetings cannot be relied upon, considered or counted for the purpose of considering whether the NEC membership seat of the affected lawyer had/has become vacant.

2) I respectfully submit that there is no condition requiring that the NEC must (by a resolution or other independent decision) declare such NEC member’s seat vacant before the provisions of section 8(8) would apply. Assuming there exists (although I am yet to see such anywhere) a requirement for the NEC to sit and pass a resolution declaring the seat of such a member vacant, failure of the NEC to sit and so declare does not adversely affect the vacancy of the seat of a member who has absented himself from three consecutive NEC meetings without a satisfactory reasonable cause shown to the NEC. In other words, in my humble opinion, his seat becoming vacant is self-executing, automatic provided the following three CONDITIONS are present:

a) He absented himself from NEC meeting on at least three consecutive occasions;

b) He either didn’t write the NEC to give “reasonable cause” for his absence at such proposed or past meeting(s) or he had actually written to the NEC, but the NEC had considered such explanation unsatisfactory.

3) It is further submitted that it’s unreasonable to argue or expect that NEC had any obligation (after each meeting or after three meetings at which a member was absent) to write to inquire of the affected member on why he failed to attend a NEC meeting or meetings. NEC’s obligation starts and ends with inviting its qualified members to every NEC meeting. An invitation to a NEC meeting is a letter. A member who receives a Letter of Invitation to a NEC meeting has three options: (a) Attend the the meeting; or (b) If you can’t attend, send your apologies giving reasonable cause (this is a reply to NEC’s Letter of Invitation); or (c) After the affected NEC meeting to write the NEC, to explain (I) why he couldn’t come and (ii) why he couldn’t/didn’t reply (i.e., send his apologies) before the NEC Meeting. This is akin to an applicant for an extension of time in usual civil court proceedings, by a party who apart from apologizing for late filing, has an ADDED responsibility to adduce credible reasons (reasonable cause) why he ailed to file within time.

4) Note, it is my further submission that it’s after NEC’s receipt or a letter (REPLY to notice of meeting) from the absentee-member, that NEC’s obligation arises to now write the affected NEC member to either say (I) we accept your explanation as satisfactory or (II) we reject your explanation as unsatisfactory. Where the NEC declares such an explanation unsatisfactory, the affected meeting becomes eligible to count or be counted as one meeting not attended by the affected NEC member and in respect of which his absence is not excused — not excused because (a) he sent no apologies or (b) sent one which was considered unsatisfactory.

5) It is respectfully submitted that the argument that NEC has an obligation to institute some form of hearing for a member who is absent at the NEC meeting on any occasion or on three consecutive occasions, has two grave implications:

a) May set a very poor precedent; may encourage some NEC members to stay away from NEC meetings, expecting that the NEC must write them after the meeting to ask “why were you absent”:

b) With due respect, it is not only disrespectful to expect the NEC to go about writing a member to inquire why the member was absent at a NEC meeting (for which he was duly invited) or at three consecutive meetings of the NEC. For God’s sake, how can one reasonably argue that a NEC member who (I) absents himself from a NEC meeting and also (II) failed/neglected/refused to send to the NEC (either before or after the meeting) an apology letter to explain his absence or to ask that his absence be excused, is still entitled to a second letter from the NEC asking him to explain why the disciplinary action of declaring his seat vacant, should not apply (or be applied)? Such a line of argument is perplexing, for three reasons:

i. It negates the universal practice and procedure of meetings, which places a responsibility on a member on whom a Notice of Meeting has been served, to either be present or send his apologies;

ii. Where the rule of the meeting of an organisation provides for sanctions to be imposed against a any member of the organisation for failure (without reasonable cause) to attend a meeting of the organisation, such sanctions usually apply against any member once two conditions are met — (a) the member failed to attend and (b) the member failed/neglected/refused to send satisfactory apologies/explanation.

iii. It may be, or not, disrespectful for a member for stay away from the meeting of an organisation; but is (more) disrespectful for such a member staying away to do so without any letter/notice of apologies sent to the organisation to explain his absence; and outright insulting for the affected member (or, indeed anyone else) to now turn around and expect the organisation (the organisation whose Notice he had ignored by its member) to still come writing the member to demand an explanation (reasonable cause) for the member’s failure to attend and for the member’s failure to extend some courtesy to the organisation by replying the Notice of Meeting earlier served on the member by the organisation. Note that failure to reply the Notice of Meeting when the member knew the member would not attend means the member has ignored the Notice of Meeting which is tantamount to also ignoring and treating the organisation with contempt.

6) In my humble opinion, section 8(8) of the NBA Constitution appears to impose a Volenti Non Fit Injuria Rule which operates automatically without any (further) action required on the part of anyone, once the necessary preconditions (as I have explained above) are present. The section is a warning to NEC members that, “Beware, if you stay absent at the NEC meeting on three consecutive occasions (without giving to the NEC, a satisfactory explanation of your absence), you automatically lose your NEC membership and thenceforth ceases to be a NEC member”. The implication of this, it is respectfully submitted, is that, where credible evidence is presented to establish that a particular lawyer has lost his NEC membership/seat by virtue of the provisions of section 8(8) of the NBA Constitution following his absence, without satisfactory explanation, at three consecutive meetings of the NEC, the burden automatically shifts on the affected lawyer to, by way of defence, present evidence to show either that (contrary to the allegation) he did not absent himself from the NEC meeting on three consecutive occasions or that even though he absented himself on three occasions as alleged, he cannot be said to have lost his NEC membership because he had, in a letter to the NEC (either before or after the/each meeting, in response to the Notice of meeting) satisfactorily explained his said absence. Satisfactory explanation, or “reasonable cause”, in my views, based on the aforesaid, means explanation which the NEC had (upon receipt of such explanation, considered acceptable or reasonable enough to justify excusing the absence of the affected lawyer). With due respect, it could be viewed as laughable for the affected lawyer to offer such ridiculous defence as, “See guys, I could not be said to have lost my seat because, although I was not present at three consecutive meetings, the NEC never invited me for a hearing to know why I did not attend neither did the NEC ever send me a letter asking that I should explain (giver reasonable cause for) my absence. If the NEC had asked me to explain, I would have explained satisfactorily. Since the NEC did not write me to explain, my membership of the NEC remains intact”. It is submitted that this sort of argument attracts three big questions unsatisfactory answers to any of which could push the argument to fall like a pack of cards:

a) Did the NEC not give you a Notice of meeting?

b) If yes, why did you not reply to notify the NEC of your absence?

c) Has the service of the Notice of Meeting on you not given you sufficient opportunity to to respond to it, asking the NEC to excuse your absence, since you would not attend?

7) If the seat of a NEC member becomes vacant by virtue of a provision of the NBA Constitution, the mere fact that the NEC, unaware that his office has become vacant, continues to send him Notice of subsequent NEC meetings, does not reverse, mitigate or displace the effect of the constitutional provision rendering his seat vacant upon the happening of the mandatory contingencies. Thus, where a member of the NEC fails (without reasonable cause shown by him, previously or subsequently) to attend the NEC meeting on three consecutive occasions, the said NEC member, according to the Constitution, loses his NEC seat. Any subsequent notice of meeting sent to such a person (who in the eyes of the Constitution has already lost his NEC seat) is as good as a Notice sent to a non-member of the NEC. Giving Notice to a non member of the organisation does not transform such a non member into a member of the organisation. It is submitted that a non member remains a non-member even if the organisation gives him/her a Notice of its meeting. Further, the NBA Constitution stipulates the conditions precedent to becoming a member of the NBA NEC, and the circumstances that may lead to a member losing his NEC membership/seat. When once any of such circumstances happens, the said member loses his membership. Such lost membership is not retrieved nor revived by the NEC innocently/mistakenly/inadvertently sending subsequent Notices of meeting to such a former member. Besides, there appears to be no provision in the NBA Constitution that a lawyer who has lost his membership of the NEC following his failure to attend the NEC meeting on three consecutive occasions, would have his membership revived if the NEC serves Notices of subsequent NEC meetings on him or if he attends any such subsequent NEC meetings or even continues to attend NEC meetings coming after the operation of the Constitution. The NBA Constitution has said what it means and meant what it has said.

8) What is the purpose of a Notice of meetings? According to section 245(1) of Companies and Allied matters Act (CAMA), 2020, failure to give notice of any company meeting to a person entitled to receive it, invalidates the meeting unless such failure is an accidental omission on the part of the person giving the notice. Section 242(1) CAMA, 2020 then provides that “The notice of a meeting shall specify the place, date and time of the meeting, and the general nature of the business to be transacted in sufficient detail to enable those to whom it is given to decide whether to attend or not…”. (emphasis mine). One crucial purpose or function of a Notice of Meeting is given in section 242(1) above: “to enable those to whom [the Notice] is given to decide whether to attend or not”. Where they decide to attend, a further decision is whether to attend personally or by proxy (see section 242(4) CAMA, 2020). Where on the other hand the member on whom the Notice is served/given decides to not attend or knows he would be unable to attend, he is under an obligation to notify the organisation of his (planned) absence and the reasons therefor. Where he sends a letter (of apology) to the organisation, it is now left for the organisation to consider his apologies and decide whether it is satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Where the Company considers his explanation satisfactory, the affected member may no longer suffer the punishment set aside for such non attendance.

9) Further, it may be relevant to also consider the effect of the portion of the usual Minutes of Meeting known as “Apologies”. This segment of the Minutes is meant to accommodate (letters of) apologies sent by members who, upon receipt of the Notice of the meeting, and aware they would not attend (for whatever reasons) have written to the Secretariat of the meeting (1) to notify the secretariat of their absence at the meeting, (b) to offer cogent reasons for such absence, (c) to offer an apology for their inability to be present, as expected, and (d) to plead that their said absence be excused based on the reasons offered, which they believe are cogent (ie, satisfactory). Note that the meeting could reject the reasons offered by such a member who failed to attend. Where the reasons offered are rejected, the implication is that the reasons are considered “not satisfactory”. If accepted, the effect is that the organisation has considered the reasons “satisfactory”, a reasonable cause. All in all, two things are clear: (I) A member of an organisation who is invited for a meeting of the organisation, but who knows (s)he would not or could not attend the meeting, has an obligation to notify the organisation, either before or after the meeting, to apologize and ask that his absence be excused. In my opinion, it sounds absurd for a member invited for a meeting to sit back at home and expect that after the meeting, the meeting should send him a second letter requesting him to explain, or give “reasonable cause” for, his absence at the meeting, before any set consequences of his failure to attend the meeting would apply. Generally, it is my submission that the rules applicable to absenteeism, will apply to all who after due receipt of the notice of the affected meeting, stayed away without any (satisfactory) apology letters sent to the organisation concerned. Accordingly, it is submitted that the provision of section 8(8) of the NBA Constitution has toed this line when is provides that a member of the NEC who fails to attend the NEC meeting on three consecutive occasions, loses his/her NEC membership unless he has offered a satisfactory explanation for his absenteeism. The provisions therefore appear more self-executing than otherwise. Writing under the title, “How to Apologize for Missing a Meeting”, Wood et all (the Editors of UpCountry) have given the following tips on what to do in such a situation. They state:

You should write a letter or email and begin with an honesty apology and use phrases like “I apologize for missing the meeting” or “I express regret over not being able to attend.” Do not make excuses or give an insincere explanation and ensure you communicate that you genuinely feel sorry (read more at: https://upjourney.com/how-to-apologize-for-missing-a-meeting)

Similarly, while listing the “Apologies” column as an essential component of a standard minutes of meeting, The Resource Centre explain that the column should contain: “a record of people who haven’t been able to come to the meeting, but have let the meeting know that they won’t be there”. (See: “Quick and easy guide to taking minutes”

https://www.resourcecentre.org.uk/information/taking-minutes/). On the its part, in a release titled “Governance: How to take and write minutes”, the University of Western Australia suggests that a “standard format for the preparation of minutes template” provides the correct layout of attendances and apologies in the minutes of a meeting, as follows:

“Record any apologies received in advance of the meeting, and advise the Chair of these before the meeting starts. Record attendees either by ticking them off against the list of members on your agenda, or on an attendance list. Be careful about this relatively easy task – members can be very sensitive about being left off the list of attendees, and about their titles and names being absolutely right! Record the names of any invitees to the meeting and indicate which item/s they attended for”. ( See: https://www.governance.uwa.edu.au/committees/principles/meetings/preparation/minutes)

Finally on this part, an organisation that goes by the name “What Makes a Good Leader” appears to have recognized that making/sending a letter of apologies when you know you would not be able to attend the meeting of an organization of which you are a member, is an important quality of a good leader and good leadership. The organization explains that “Apologies are notifications from meeting participants indicating that they are unable to attend the meeting”. (see: Effective Meetings: Recording Meeting Minutes” by Ian Pratt (http://www.whatmakesagoodleader.com/meeting-minutes.html#:~:text=Apologies%20are%20notifications%20from%20meeting,unable%20to%20attend%20the%20meeting.). In recognition of the duty of a participant to apologize for not being able to attend a meeting or for missing a meeting, so many organisations and platforms now provide lecture notes, and organize training exercises, and tutorials and specimen letters bothering on how to apologize for missing or being late to a meeting. Some examples of such organisations/platforms include the Harvard Business Review, English Live, Career Ride, Letters Pro, and Up Journey. The point I have tried to make here is that a member of an organisation who, after having received a Notice of a meeting of the organisation, failed to attend same and failed to send his/her apology letter to the orgnanisation should be prepared to accept in good faith the necessary consequences of his deliberate actions. Aristotle made this clear when he posited that that “we are responsible for our voluntary actions… whereas for our involuntary actions we may be liable to either pardon or pity”. Thus, by virtue of section 8(8) of the NBA Constitution, 2015, an NBA-NEC member’s omission (1) to attend the NEC meeting, if such omission continues for three consecutive meetings and is accompanied by (2) the member’s omission to give reasonable cause for the omission to attend, are omissions which both combine to render the affected member’s NBA-NEC seat terminated/vacant. I so submit with due respect.

Long live the NBA!

Respectfully,

Sylvester Udemezue (udems)
08109024556, udemsyl@gmail.com.
(14 May 2022)

 

NBA ELECTIONS: KAYODE BELLO AMENDS PETITION AGAINST MAIKYAU

Embattled Bar aspirant, Mr. Kayode Bello has provided additional grounds to support his petition against the candidacy of a leading Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) presidential aspirant, Mr. Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau SAN.

In an email to the Secretary of the Electoral “Commission” of the Nigerian Bar Association dated May 2, 2022 and copied to CITY LAWYER among others, Bello wrote: “Please kindly find attached my petition against Mr. YC Maikyau with amendment and more documents.” Among those copied are the United Nations, United States Embassy in Nigeria and the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC).

He cited Section 10 of the NBA Constitution (as amended) and argued that “In my own view, this proviso of the Constitution implies that the grounds are not limited to the grounds specified in the second schedule of the NBA constitution, 2015 (as amended in 2021).”

The letter was titled “AMENDMENT/ADDENDUM TO RE: PETITON AGAINST Y. C. MAIKYAU AT THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS’ PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE: NEED FOR PROPER SCRUTINY AND SUSPENSION OF Y. C. MAIKYAU’S CANDIDATURE AS NBA PRESIDENTIAL ASPIRANT.”

Bello, who was expelled from the Nigerian Law School for alleged misconduct, then cited Section 9(3)(f) of the NBA Constitution and argued that “The intendment given and the intention of the draftsmen of the NBA Constitution are that those who aspire to become the President and General Secretary of the Association must be of proven, impeccable, and unimpeachable character, and if there is any evidence adduced as such in this case as against Mr. Y. C. Maikyau, such evidence of conspiracy and disobedience of Court Order (Contempt of Court) by Mr. Y. C. Maikyau according to Sections 133 and 126 of the Nigerian Criminal Code (sic).”

He concluded that he “would be glad and ready to forward and present more facts or information if or when needed.”

Bello proceeded to attach several documents relating to his face-off with the Nigerian Law School, the ensuing court battle and his petition against Maikyau at the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC).

It is recalled that CITY LAWYER had in an exclusive report cited the initial petition by Bello who based the ground of his petition on section 20 (1)(f) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Constitution 2021 (as amended) which states that “A National Officer may be removed from office where he /she is involved in an act or behavior that brings or is likely to bring the Association into disrepute.‘’

He had urged the ECNBA “to suspend the candidature of Mr. Y. C. Maikyau as the NBA presidential Aspirant, pending the determination of the disciplinary case against him at the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) for his misconduct.”

While Maikyau declined comment on the petition, it was unclear at press time whether the electoral committee has taken a decision on the petition.

 

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

COPYRIGHT 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

AKPATA IMPLEMENTS NEW CONSTITUTION, SETS UP DIASPORA FORUM

Barely 48 hours after CITY LAWYER broke the news of approval of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) amended Constitution by the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), the NBA leadership under Mr. Olumide Akpata has commenced implementation of the new constitution.

In a press statement made available to CITY LAWYER by NBA Publicity Secretary, Dr. Rapulu Nduka, the association stated that “The forum is to serve as a platform to connect and provide a voice for all persons qualified to practice law in Nigeria, but resident outside Nigeria.”

The statement added that “This forum will also serve as a structured platform through which all lawyers in the diaspora may contribute their quota – individually and collectively – to the development of the Nigerian Bar, the Nigerian legal system, and the practice of law in Nigeria.”

Section 4 of the amended constitution provides that “There shall be three categories of membership: Full Membership, Honorary Membership, and International Membership.” Section 4(3) further provides that “Any person who is called to the bar or qualified to practice as a lawyer in any jurisdiction other than Nigeria may apply to be admitted as an international member of the Association upon the payment of a prescribed subscription fee.”

The full text of the press statement reads:

NBA ESTABLISHES LAWYERS IN DIASPORA FORUM (LDF)

Dear Colleague,

Recall that one of the innovations in the recently amended NBA Constitution 2021, is the establishment of a Lawyers in Diaspora Forum (LDF). The forum is to serve as a platform to connect and provide a voice for all persons qualified to practice law in Nigeria, but resident outside Nigeria. This forum will also serve as a structured platform through which all lawyers in the diaspora may contribute their quota – individually and collectively – to the development of the Nigerian Bar, the Nigerian legal system, and the practice of law in Nigeria.

To join this forum, a prospective member must (i) be qualified to practice law in Nigeria; (ii) belong to a branch of the NBA; (iii) have paid his/her Bar Practice Fees; and (iv) be resident outside Nigeria. Anyone who meets these requirements is urged to kindly complete the attached form –
https://forms.gle/FduB6ACviQCRcYz76

Kindly note that the personal data provided while completing this form will be used strictly by the NBA to maintain a central register for NBA lawyers in the diaspora and for communicating directly with its members on matters relating to the NBA generally, or to the forum specifically.

Dr. Rapulu Nduka
Publicity Secretary,
Nigerian Bar Association

Copyright 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

UNCERTAINTY OVER NBA ELECTION, AS AMENDED CONSTITUTION REGISTRATION STALLS

The delay in registration of the amended Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Constitution is posing a serious threat to the planned National Officers Election slated for July 16, 2022, CITY LAWYER can authoritatively report.

Sources who are familiar with the matter told CITY LAWYER that the uncertainty over the legal regime that will underpin the eagerly awaited Election has thrown the Electoral Committee of the NBA (ECNBA) into confusion.

According to one of the sources, “Without clarity on the constitutional framework applicable, ECNBA cannot move on elections.”

CITY LAWYER recalls that former Secretary to the NBA Constitution Review Committee, Mr. Olasupo Ojo had petitioned the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), urging it to decline registration of the amended NBA Constitution. In the letter titled “NOTICE OF OBJECTION TO REPEAL OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION CONSTITUTION, 2015 (AS AMENDED IN 2019), Ojo argued that the NBA “duly adopted and passed the resolution to amend the Extant Constitution at the 2021 Annual General Meeting,” adding that “Contrary to the foregoing state of fact and resolutions of the AGM, it now appears that the NBA had inadvertently inserted the following into the proposed NBA Constitution 2021 which purports to now repeal the extant Constitution:

i. Insertion of Sections 28 and 29 which purports to Repeal the Extant Constitution.

ii. Insertion of a Cover which reads: Nigeria Bar Association Constitution 2021.”

CITY LAWYER gathered that the CAC may have referred the petition to the NBA leadership for its response.

Another ranking source told CITY LAWYER that if the uncertainty is not quickly resolved, several constitutional deadlines may be missed or the ECNBA may be forced to compress timelines, posing challenges.

Painting a grave picture of the magnitude of the crisis, a key stakeholder told CITY LAWYER that the uncertainty over the legal regime has a “chilling” effect on the entire electoral process.

Watchers of NBA politics observe that if the ECNBA has to fall back on the 2015 NBA Constitution, this may pose additional challenges to the electoral process, especially as it relates to payment of branch dues and attendant challenges as to compilation of voters’ register.

Efforts by CITY LAWYER to get an update from the CAC on the registration proved abortive, as the Registrar General, Mr. Garba Abubakar did not respond to our telephone call or to SMS and WhatsApp messages sent to his verified telephone number.

However, NBA President, Mr. Olumide Akpata told CITY LAWYER that there is no cause for concern, saying: “The process should be completed this week or early next week at the latest.”

It is recalled that the NBA National Executive Council (NEC) had approved Saturday, 16th of July, 2022 for the conduct of the election of new National Executive Committee members.

Copyright 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

LAWYER PETITIONS CAC TO REJECT NEW NBA CONSTITUTION

Former Secretary of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Constitution Review Committee, Mr. Olasupo Ojo has urged the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) to reject the newly amended NBA Constitution, saying it contains provisions not approved at the recent NBA Annual General Meeting (AGM) in Port Harcourt.

In an objection letter obtained by CITY LAWYER and addressed to the CAC Registrar General, Mr. Abubakar Garba, the fiery senior lawyer said that he was writing “to formally object to your Commission’s approval of the purported amendments now seeking to repeal the Extant Constitution.”

According to Ojo, “Contrary to the provisions of section 833 above, the NBA by its Notice now seeks to repeal the Extant Constitution pursuant to Sections 28 and 29 of the proposed Nigerian Bar Association Constitution 2021 while no such resolution to repeal was ever passed. Find attached herewith as Annexure 3, the Resolutions passed at the 2021 Annual General Meeting (“AGM”) of the NBA, held on the 28th day of October, 2021 at the Yakubu Gowon Stadium, Elekahia, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, which clearly shows that no resolution was made to repeal the Extant Constitution.”

In the letter titled “NOTICE OF OBJECTION TO REPEAL OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION CONSTITUTION, 2015 (AS AMENDED IN 2019), Ojo argued that the NBA “duly adopted and passed the resolution to amend the Extant Constitution at the 2021 Annual General Meeting,” adding that “Contrary to the foregoing state of fact and resolutions of the AGM, it now appears that the NBA had inadvertently inserted the following into the proposed NBA Constitution 2021 which purports to now repeal the extant Constitution:

i. Insertion of Sections 28 and 29 which purports to Repeal the Extant Constitution.

ii. Insertion of a Cover which reads: Nigeria Bar Association Constitution 2021.”

The Bar Leader stated that the process for the amendment of a Constitution “is entirely different, separate and distinct from the process for enacting a brand-new Constitution. As with the instant case, since no such notice was given to repeal the extant Constitution, the 2021 Annual General Meeting of the NBA could not have had the mandate or powers to repeal the extant NBA Constitution, especially since the AGM only had a notice to amend.”

Ojo said that the 2021 NBA AGM “has never purported to have repealed the 2015 Constitution, but merely amended same.” He added that “It is also trite that for the Extant Constitution to be repealed, there must be a 60 days’ Notice to such effect.”

He stated that “the crux of my objection, in precis, is on the grounds that the AGM only had notice to amend the Extant Constitution, and duly adopted and passed resolution to so amend. The present sections 28 and 29 of the proposed NBA Constitution 2021, seeks to outrightly repeal the Extant Constitution. To duly so repeal the Extant Constitution, there should have been 60 days’ notice to such effect in accordance with Section 20(1) of the Extant Constitution. This was however, not the case. Therefore, the 2021 AGM of the NBA held on the 28th day of October, 2021 at the Yakubu Gowon Stadium, Elekahia, Port Harcourt, Rivers State could not have duly adopted and passed any resolution (which it never claims to have passed) repealing the Extant Constitution.”

He prayed the CAC to reject the amendment as proposed, adding that he is “by this letter formally objecting to repeal the Extant Constitution as contained in sections 28 and 29 of the proposed NBA Constitution 2021, as same is not a true reflection of the resolutions reached at the AGM and notice to repeal, not having been circulated as mandated by the Extant Constitution.”

He urged the CAC to “uphold this objection” by refusing to register and approve the proposed “Nigerian Bar Association Constitution 2021” for failure to reflect amendments, for which proper notice had been given, duly approved and passed by the AGM.

He also urged the Commission to request the NBA to amend the cover of the proposed NBA Constitution 2021 to read as follows: “Nigerian Bar Association 2015 Constitution (as amended in 2021),” adding that that “is a true reflection of the resolution of the AGM.”

Ojo prayed the Commission to “further mandate the NBA to delete Sections 28 and 29 therein wrongly, unlawfully and illegally inserted into the proposed Nigerian Bar Association Constitution 2021” and “to resubmit a corrected version of its Constitution reflecting amendments, for which proper notice had been given, duly approved and passed by the AGM.”

In a “Forwarding letter” to the NBA President, Mr. Olumide Akpata also dated February 4, 2021 Ojo stated that the Public Notice “is an indication of your willingness to accommodate diverse views, comments and sincere commitment to due process.”

“I greatly commend your open mindedness sir,” said Ojo, “and further to the said public notice, I now hereby forward herewith a copy of my Notice of Objection on the referenced subject to the Corporate Affairs Commission (“CAC”), as demanded in the said Public Notice.”

Intimating Akpata of the kernel of his objection letter to CAC, Ojo said that it is “premised on the likelihood of innocent mistakes from the NBA National Secretariat, in the compilation of the proposed amendments to the Extant Constitution. I say so because I am well aware that the AGM only had notice to amend the Extant Constitution, and duly adopted and passed resolution to so amend. The present sections 28 and 29 of the proposed NBA Constitution 2021, seeks to outrightly repeal the Extant Constitution. Even the cover of the proposed amendment reads: Nigerian Bar Association Constitution 2021. Which further gives the semblance that the Extant Constitution has been repealed.”

It is recalled that Ojo had also petitioned the CAC against amendment of the 2015 NBA Constitution. In a petition with Ref No. CAC/IT/MIA/No.2365 dated 14 September, 2016, Ojo had argued that the 2015 Constitution (as amended), for which the endorsement of the CAC is being sought “belatedly,” did not amend or alter the subsisting 2001 NBA Constitution approved by the CAC.

CITY LAWYER investigation shows that the amendment debacle may not be unconnected with the forthcoming NBA Election, especially as it affects provisions of the NBA Constitution on the zoning of offices. A frontline Bar Leader told CITY LAWYER that if the amendment sails through as currently proposed by the NBA, the zoning arrangement may start afresh instead of track back to the 2015 NBA Constitution (amended).

The citation for the proposed NBA Constitution reads: “This Constitution may be cited as the Nigerian Bar Association Constitution, 2021 and comes into effect this 28th day of October 2021 upon its adoption by the Annual General Meeting.”

The NBA leadership is yet to respond to Ojo’s objection at press time.

CAC_LETTER_OJO

Copyright 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

MAIKYAU/TAIDI: ECNBA REPLIES OJO, VOWS TO ENFORCE NBA CONSTITUTION

The Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA) has responded to the enquiry by fiery senior lawyer, Mr. Olasupo Ojo seeking clarification on the zoning of NBA offices in the forthcoming National Officers Election.

In a letter obtained by CITY LAWYER and dated 1st February, 2022, the Committee declined the query posed by Ojo, pleading that “The duties of the ECNBA are governed by the statutory instruments of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and does not, regrettably at the moment, extend to providing advisory opinions.”

The Committee in the letter signed by Mr. Richard Akintunde SAN and Ms. Mabel Ekeke, its Chairman and Secretary respectively, however assured Ojo that it would “administer the applicable rules fairly and firmly at all times.”

CITY LAWYER had reported that Ojo sought a clarification from the ECNBA on the import of section 9(3) of the NBA Constitution and paragraphs 2.2(b) & 2.2(d) of the Second Schedule on the 2022 NBA National Officers’ Election.

Watchers of NBA politics believe that an interpretation of the provisions may lead to the disqualification of two leading presidential aspirants for the 2022 NBA poll, namely Messrs Yakubu Maikyau SAN and Jonathan Taidi, leaving the coast clear for another presidential aspirant, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama SAN.

Below is the full text of the letter to Ojo.

Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association ecnba@nigerianbar.org.ng

1st February 2022

Olasupo Ojo, Esq
Lawbold
No. 4 Nurudeen Street
Anifowose, Ikeja
Lagos.

Sent by Email: olasupo.ojo@gmail.com

Dear. Mr. Ojo,

RE: YOUR ENQUIRY AS TO THE IMPORT OF SECTION 9(3) OF THE NBA CONSTITUTION AND PARAGRAPHS 2.2(B) & 2.2(D) OF THE SECOND SCHEDULE ON THE 2022 NBA NATIONAL OFFICERS’ ELECTION

We thank you for your letter, Ref: OO/ECNBA/ABJ/ECNBA/02/22 of the 25th January 2022 in respect of the above.

The Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA) has carefully reviewed the contents of your letter and note your request. The duties of the ECNBA are governed by the statutory instruments of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and does not, regrettably at the moment, extend to providing advisory opinions.

You can nevertheless be rest assured that the ECNBA will administer the applicable rules fairly and firmly at all times. We thank you once again for your continuing interest in the work of the ECNBA.

All our very best.

Yours sincerely,

Ayodele Akintunde, SAN, C.Arb                                                                                               Mabel Ekeke
Chairman, ECNBA                                                                                                                            Secretary, ECNBA

Copyright 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

NBA ELECTION: MAIKYAU, TAIDI’S FATE HANGS IN BALANCE AS LAWYER ‘PETITIONS’ ECNBA

The reported ambition of two leading contenders for the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) presidency may be in jeopardy as a senior lawyer has demanded interpretation of the NBA Constitution from the Electoral Committee of the NBA (ECNBA).

According to a letter obtained by CITY LAWYER and dated January 25, 2022, former Secretary of the NBA Constitution Review Committee, Mr. Olasupo Ojo has asked the recently inaugurated committee to interpret especially Section 9(3) of the recently amended NBA Constitution.

Meanwhile, Ojo confirmed to CITY LAWYER that he has delivered the letter to the committee, saying: “Yes. It is already delivered to the Chairman and some members. They acknowledged.” On his part, ECNBA Chairman, Mr. Richard Akintunde SAN also told CITY LAWYER that the committee is in receipt of the letter, adding that it would respond in due course.

In the letter addressed to ECNBA Chairman and marked “URGENT” with reference number OO/ECNBA/ABJ/ECNBA/02/22, Ojo wrote: “In the main, I write to formally seek the attention of the ECNBA, for the proper interpretation of the mandatory provisions of section 9(3) of the NBA Constitution as well as paragraphs 2.2(b) and 2.2(d) of the second schedule in light of the forthcoming 2022 NBA National Officers’ election.”

Continuing, the fiery senior lawyer said: “Pursuant to the dictates of section 9(3) of NBA Constitution and paragraphs 2.2(b) and 2.2(d) of the second schedule, the rotation of the candidacy for the office of the presidency amongst different groups/sections in the geographical zones created by the NBA Constitution has been and is an intrinsic provision of the NBA Constitution; which has since been endorsed by the 2020 Electoral Reform and Audit Committee which recommended inter alia that same;

                  “…should be strictly adhered to in order to ensure that no group and/or section in a geographical zone is                         marginalized and the unity of the bar is preserved.”

“This report and recommendation was also given imprimatur by its subsequent adoption by the NBA NEC as contained in the communiqué issued by the President and General Secretary of the Association on March 18, 2021. Kindly find attached the relevant pages of the report, NEC minutes of meeting and communiqué for ease of reference.”

He noted that section 9(3) of the NBA Constitution provides that the country shall be divided into three zones as set out in the Second Schedule for the purposes of election into national offices.

Quoting Paragraph 2.2(b) of the second schedule to the NBA Constitution, Ojo identified the geographical zones as Northern, Eastern and Western Zones, adding that “what constitutes different groups or sections in the NBA Constitution is akin to the geopolitical zones within the geographical zones.”

Ojo noted that Paragraph 2.2(d) of the Second Schedule to the NBA Constitution provides that “Where a position is zoned to any particular geographical zone, the position shall be rotated and held in turn by the different groups and/or sections in the geographical zone.”

According to Ojo, “Having due regard to paragraph 2.2(d) of the second schedule to the NBA Constitution reproduced above, an aspirant to the Office of the Presidency of the NBA has to be from a section/geo-political zone in the geographical zone where the Presidency is zoned, in this case the North for 2022 NBA election, in compliance with the constitutional rotation requirement. This rotation within the geographical zones also applies to the positions of 1st Vice President, 2nd Vice President, 3rd Vice President and General Secretary which have all been zoned to specific geographical zones for the purposes of the 2022 NBA elections as pointed out above. That is to say that within the Western zone, the rotational principle will apply in view of the different sections/groups which are mid-west and south-west while in the Eastern Zone; rotation is to be between the south-south and south-east. In the same vein, the rotation is to be amongst the North-Central, North-West and North-East geopolitical zones within the Northern zone.”

He noted that following the build-up to the 2022 NBA election which has been zoned to the North, “there are several prospective aspirants for the position of the NBA President from the Northern Zone, many of whom have consulted me in respect thereof.

“I seek the clarification and/or confirmation of the ECNBA as to the import of section 9(3) of the NBA Constitution and paragraph 2.2(d) of the second schedule of the NBA Constitution on the 2022 NBA general election in the determination of the issue as to the eligibility status of aspirants emerging from the sub-zones from the North, West and East geopolitical zones respectively with respect to the offices zoned to them.. In my humble view the need for this clarification now is germane to the transparency and fairness of the electoral process and clearly represents the clear and mandatory provision of the just amended NBA Constitution and should ideally therefore be expressly indicated in the guidelines that will be issued and published by the ECNBA in due course.”

Concluding, Ojo wrote: “In the circumstances, I seek the required clarification as it relates to the rotation amongst the various sections/groups within the respective zones that are to produce the next NBA President, General Secretary and Vice Presidents in order to be properly guided as a voter and key stakeholder of the Bar. This is more so as consultations are ongoing and I intend to possibly contest or play key roles in the electioneering process at the appropriate time. I humbly entreat you to treat this matter with utmost fairness, transparency, justice and strict adherence to the rule of law as it is a sensitive issue touching on the future of the Nigerian Bar. I await your prompt response on this matter so that I can be guided accordingly.”

Watchers of NBA politics believe that the petition may affect the political fortunes of two leading contenders for the NBA Presidency, namely Mr. Yakubu Maikyau SAN and immediate past NBA General Secretary, Mr. Jonathan Taidi, leaving the coast clear for another strong contender, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama SAN.

While Maikyau is from Kebbi State in the North West Zone, Taidi is from Niger State in the North Central Zone. Gadzama is from Borno State in the North East. It is believed that while the North Central has produced former NBA presidents, Chief Bayo Ojo SAN and Mr. Joseph Daudu SAN both from Kogi State, the North West has produced former NBA President, Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud SAN from Kano State. On the other hand, the North East is yet to produce an NBA President.

It is unclear at press time whether the two leading aspirants are aware of the letter to ECNBA, as they are yet to react to the development.

OLASUPO OJO_ECNBA

Copyright 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

INTERNET VOTING VIOLATES NBA CONSTITUTION, SAYS GADZAMA

  • SEEKS INCLUSION OF YOUNG LAWYERS IN STANDING COMMITTEES

Former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) presidential candidate, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama SAN has warned that a reform of the association’s electoral process has become “urgent,” adding that the NBA Constitution does not envisage internet voting as currently used for past NBA elections.

In a memorandum to the NBA Constitution Review Committee, Gadzama argued that “It is my humble but firm personal view that the electronic voting envisaged in the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Constitution is voting without the use of internet. Indeed, the universal suffrage stipulated by NBA Constitution is a welcome development and can be achieved transparently with strict adherence to electronic voting.”

According to the leading litigator and arbitrator, “Electronic voting will entail voting at all the branches of the NBA at their respective election centers and in the presence of the agents of the various candidates, through the use of dedicated computers or electronic voting machines for members to cast their votes. Upon casting of votes, there could be a paper backup to enhance the accountability, transparency and auditability of the election. Significantly, all these are not obtainable with internet voting. This electronic system has been adopted and used in the past by the NBA Abuja branch for its branch elections.”

Gadzama noted that current NBA President, Mr. Olumide Akpata “expressed initial concerns over the 2020 electoral process shortly before the election,” adding that “Mr. Dele Adesina, SAN who was a Presidential contestant at the said election rejected the outcome of the election which rejection almost tore the Bar apart but for the intervention of eminent members of our noble profession.”

Below is the full text of the memorandum.

MEMORANDUM TO THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (NBA) CONSTITUTION REVIEW COMMITTEE

BY

JOE-KYARI GADZAMA, OFR, MFR, SAN, FNIALS, FICMC, FCIArb, Chartered Arbitrator.
Chairman, Mentorship Committee of the Body of Benchers
Formerly: Pioneer Chairman, NBA – SPIDEL; Vice Chairman, NBA – SLP; Council Member, NBA – SBL & Chairman, NBA Abuja Branch.

1.0 INTRODUCTION:

1.1 This memorandum is in response to the call by the NBA Constitution Review Committee for submission of memoranda on further amendments to the provisions of the NBA Constitution 2015 (as amended). As a major stakeholder in the process, having contested the 2016 NBA National Officers’ election, this memorandum is my modest contribution to this genuine reform process. In the light of the foregoing; I hereby recommend some Constitutional amendments and other proposed reforms outlined hereunder for consideration by the Committee in line with your terms of reference.

2.0 YOUNG LAWYERS’ REPRESENTATION AT NEC:

2.1 It is my view that young lawyers ought to have constitutional representatives at the NEC meetings in order for them to feel a sense of responsibility and belonging in this noble profession and for them to realize that their interests are being protected. Section 7 (1) only provides for National Officers, All past Presidents and General secretaries, all chairmen and secretaries or registered branches, one other representative of each branch, chairmen and secretaries of sections and other deserving members of the Association which include Senior Advocates of Nigeria, senior members who are over 25 years post-call and special interest groups/active members who are over 10 years post-call.

2.2 It is my humble recommendation that the affairs of young lawyers can be statutorily represented at the NEC meetings by amendment of Section 7 (1) by the introduction of a new Section 7 (1) (f) to specifically list at least the Chairman of Young Lawyers’ Forum as statutory member of NEC. The current 7 (1) (f) can now be the new Section 7 (1) (g).

3.0 YOUNG LAWYERS’ MEMBERSHIPS AT STANDING COMMITTEES

3.1 By the interpretation of Section 12 (3) (b) under the membership of standing committees and Section 10 (10) of the third schedule of the Constitution, it states that the Chairman of each committee shall be a member of not less than 10 years post-call while the Secretary shall be a member of not less than 5 years post-call. There is no explicit involvement of young lawyers in the make-up and representation of the members in the standing committees.

3.2 It is my view that Young Lawyers can be statutorily represented in these committees by drafting them in various committees and thereby making sure that they are actively involved in the affairs of the NBA. Therefore there can be new Sections 12 (3) (c) & Section 10 (10) (c) of the third schedule of the Constitution which explicitly mention the involvement/representation of young lawyers from 0- 7 years post call in various standing committees. The current Sections 12 (3) (d) can now be 12 (3) (e) and Section 10 (10) (f) of the third schedule of the Constitution be changed to Section 10 (10) (g).

4.0 VOTING METHOD UNDER THE NBA CONSTITUTION:

4.1 It is my humble but firm personal view that the electronic voting envisaged in the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Constitution is voting without the use of internet. Indeed, the universal suffrage stipulated by NBA Constitution is a welcome development and can be achieved transparently with strict adherence to electronic voting. This view is fortified by the express provision of section 9(4) of the Nigerian Bar Association Constitution which states thus:

“Section 9(4) – Election into National Offices shall be by universal suffrage and electronic voting as set out in Second Schedule.”(Emphasis ours)
Paragraph 2.4(a) of the said Second Schedule of the NBA Constitution provides that;
“Voting at the election shall be by electronic means (E-voting).”(Emphasis mine)

4.2 The true intention of the Constitution, I humbly submit, for conduct of elections electronically without the use of the internet can further be discerned from paragraph 2.4 (c) of the second schedule which provides for verification of voters, place, time and platform to be utilized for electronic voting for each particular election year taking into consideration the state of available technology and information technology infrastructure of the branches in order to afford all registered voters the opportunity to vote.

4.3 Voting over the internet has proven to be non-transparent and problematic which has led to the challenge in Court of the outcome of the 2016 and 2018 NBA elections conducted using internet voting. The system of voting over the internet is highly susceptible to manipulations and experience has also shown that genuine cases of disenfranchisement of eligible voters keep recurring. Recall that the NBA President, Mr. Olumide Akpata, expressed initial concerns over the 2020 electoral process shortly before the election while Mr. Dele Adesina, SAN who was a Presidential contestant at the said election rejected the outcome of the election which rejection almost tore the Bar apart but for the intervention of eminent members of our noble profession. This dissatisfaction was a result of some of the inevitable challenges associated with internet voting.

4.4 As stated earlier, the electronic voting envisaged under the NBA Constitution is different from internet voting which was used to conduct the 2016, 2018 and 2020 NBA National Officers’ election as a result of the misinterpretation of the relevant sections. Internet by definition is a global computer network providing a variety of information and communication facilities, consisting of interconnected networks using standardized communication protocols. Electronic, on the other hand, can be said to be a device having or operating with components such as microchips and transistors that control and direct electric currents.

4.5 It is clear that while internet voting requires the use of electronics, electronic voting does not require the use of internet. I-voting (which has been used over time by NBA at the National level) relies totally on the use of the internet, whereas E-voting, envisaged under the NBA Constitution, does not require the internet. E-voting envisages a situation where all the branches of the NBA at their respective election centers and in the presence of the monitoring agents of the various candidates, will use dedicated computers or electronic voting machines to cast their votes.

4.6 Electronic voting will entail voting at all the branches of the NBA at their respective election centers and in the presence of the agents of the various candidates, through the use of dedicated computers or electronic voting machines for members to cast their votes. Upon casting of votes, there could be a paper backup to enhance the accountability, transparency and auditability of the election. Significantly, all these are not obtainable with internet voting. This electronic system has been adopted and used in the past by the NBA Abuja branch for its branch elections.

5.0 POSSIBLE AMENDMENT OF NBA CONSTITUTION:

5.1 Although it is my interpretation that the NBA Constitution envisages electronic voting (without use of internet), we can still continue with internet voting considering that it is more convenient and in line with the global trend. For these reasons, I will also be inclined towards internet voting provided that the vote of each voter is revealed instantly to show who the voter casts his ballot for. After all, we are all members of the same professional family of lawyers. Indeed, this will make the system more transparent and any result that it produces will be generally acceptable by the majority. In that case, it would be ideal to amend section 9(4) of the NBA Constitution and paragraph 2.4 of the schedule to eliminate any ambiguity and to bring it in line with the adopted electronic voting system.

6.0 OPEN BALLOT SYSTEM:

6.1 As stated earlier, if internet voting is to be adopted for future elections which appears to be the preference due to convenience and the fact that it is in line with the global trend, it will therefore be my strong recommendation that there should be full real-time disclosure of the names of voters and who they cast their votes for. This is akin to the Option A4 voting system in conventional elections. Display of the votes as they are being cast, showing the choice of voters, will indeed enhance accountability and transparency of the process.

6.2 I understand that some persons may prefer that their votes remain anonymous, if this is the position adopted by the NBA, then the choice of the voters may be kept hidden whilst the real-time tally is revealed to everyone. Furthermore, there should be a hidden trail to show who a voter opted for which would only be revealed in the instance of a dispute as to the result or credibility of the election.

7.0 EARLY SET-UP OF ELECTORAL COMMITTEE:

7.1 The responsibility of conducting the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) National Officers’ election rests squarely with the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA). It is my fervent recommendation that this important committee should be set up early enough to begin preparations for the election in every election year in good time. Since the deadline for payment of Bar Practicing Fees is end of March in every given year, we should consider setting up the ECNBA in April so that they can commence work in good time and possibly release guidelines in May of the election year. This will go a long way in ensuring that adequate preparations are made in advance for every NBA elections.

8.0 INVOLVEMENT OF SITTING NBA PRESIDENT IN THE PROCESS:

8.1 Another issue that has to be addressed frontally is the involvement of the sitting NBA President and indeed the sitting NBA EXCO in the election process which sometimes confers an undue advantage on any candidate ‘anointed’ by the incumbent NBA President. In 2016, the then incumbent President was openly partisan and he engaged in open campaigns and endorsements of my opponent at that time and these contributed to the absence of a level playing field for all candidates in that election. Another worrisome trend is the appointment of all ECNBA Chairmen from the zone of the sitting President. In 2016, Mr. Ken Mozia, SAN who is from the same zone with the then sitting President – Mr. Augustine Alegeh, SAN was the ECNBA Chairman. In 2018, Prof. Auwalu Yadudu was the ECNBA Chairman and was from the same zone as the then NBA President, Mr. A. B. Mahmoud, SAN. In 2020, Mr. Tawo Tawo, SAN from the same zone with the then NBA President, Mr. Paul Usoro, SAN, was appointed as the ECNBA Chairman. No doubt, all three former NBA Presidents did their best to uplift the Bar during their tenure and all the ECNBA Chairmen appointed during their respective regimes are respectable and reputable senior members of the Bar, but that is not the issue. The issue here is the perception of the majority of members of the Bar. Could this be a coincidence or a deliberate ploy, as assumed by many, to ensure that only those supposedly very close to the NBA President are appointed as ECNBA Chairman? I believe that deliberate efforts should be made to discourage a pattern whereby only someone from the same zone with the sitting NBA President is appointed as ECNBA Chairman. No doubt, this will go a long way in building confidence in the process. By all means, the ECNBA should be able to maintain sufficient independence from the NBA leadership, particularly the President.

9.0 REAL TIME MONITORING OF VOTES & AUTOMATIC COLLATION OF RESULTS

9.1 The votes as they are being cast should be displayed real time in a transparent manner accessible to all members of the Association. Collation of votes should also be automatic after the last ballot is cast unlike what we had in 2016 when there was a delay of over one hour and twenty minutes before releasing the results on the display screen after the close of polls at 12 midnight on Sunday, 31st July 2016.

10.0 DUE PROCESS FOR ENGAGEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICE PROVIDER

10.1 For future elections, there should be clear yardsticks, objective basis and/or set parameters for engagement of any IT service provider that will provide any IT infrastructure and/or support for the NBA elections. Mechanisms must be put in place to ensure that only qualified, experienced and competent IT Companies without interest in the outcome of the election are engaged. Due diligence must be conducted on any prospective IT Company before engagement. As I stated earlier in an interview, it should be a Company that has no real interest in who emerges as winners of the election other than a reflection of the wishes of the majority of members of the Bar. Importantly, the selection and/or appointment of IT Company should not be done or influenced by the NBA President; rather it should be done independently by the ECNBA with the active involvement of the candidates (especially the Presidential candidates). Candidates should also be allowed to audit the infrastructures of the IT Company before it deploys its facilities.

11.0 SEAMLESS VOTER REGISTRATION PROCESS

11.1 Voter registration is an integral aspect of any election. It is a pre-condition for voting in NBA election as stipulated in paragraph 2.2(f) of the second schedule to the NBA Constitution. The NBA electoral process should be configured in such a way that all eligible voters, who have paid their Bar Practicing Fees (BPF) by 31st March of every given year, are allowed and given the opportunity to vote seamlessly for candidates of their choice. The list of financially up-to-date members should be automatically collated and made public shortly after the deadline for payment of BPF. In the past, there have been genuine and verified complaints of the inability of some of our eligible members to register for the voting process. To my mind, the registration process should be stress-free and transparent without any impediments.

11.2 Another pre-condition for voting in the NBA election as stipulated in paragraph 2.3 (d) of the second schedule to the NBA Constitution is that the full list of all legal practitioners qualified to vote shall be published at least 28 days before the date of the election. This provision can be reviewed and the time frame changed to at least 60 days to enable those whose names may have been inadvertently left out of the register to have ample time for same to be rectified. This would solve the issue of eligible voters claiming that they have been disenfranchised. It would be ideal to create a longer time between publication of the names and the date of the election given what had transpired in the past elections.

12.0 INVOLVEMENT OF NBA SECRETARIAT IN THE PROCESS

12.1 The NBA Constitution currently vests the responsibility of conducting National Officers’ elections on the ECNBA. However, there is still some level of involvement of the NBA National Secretariat in the process and since the secretariat is also manned by NBA Staff (some of whom are lawyers), the issue of partisanship cannot be overruled. See paragraph 2.3 (d) of the second schedule to the Constitution which gives the National Secretariat the responsibility, in conjunction with the ECNBA, to publish the full list of all eligible legal practitioners. This committee should consider a mechanism or system that will result in reduced involvement of the NBA Secretariat in the system. Currently, paragraph 2.1 (d) of the second schedule to the NBA Constitution provides that completed forms received in respect of the elections shall be forwarded to the NBA Secretariat and thereafter referred to the Electoral Committee. To reduce and/or check any possible interference by the NBA Secretariat, it is desirable to amend the referenced provision to constitutionally allow completed forms to be submitted directly to the ECNBA. Furthermore, the feasibility of the ECNBA liaising directly with the NBA Branches for data should also be looked into. In conclusion, there must be a level playing field in any NBA elections and all candidates must be given access to interrogate every stage of the electoral process. It should be a fair contest.

13.0 CONCLUSION
13.1 The urgent need for the reform of the NBA electoral system cannot be overemphasized. It is indeed a collective responsibility of all of us to meaningfully & timely contribute to this electoral reform process in our little way. It is my fervent hope, genuine desire and humble prayer that these proposals will be duly considered in the overall interest of the entire Bar and towards minimizing the spate of disputes arising from future NBA elections so that together we can earn our deserved respect in the eyes of Nigerian politicians and Nigerians generally.

Thank you.
Dated 19th April, 2021.

MEMO_GADZAMA

Copyright 2020 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

EXCLUSIVE: ECNBA BARS PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES FROM ‘THE PLATFORM’ DEBATE

BY EMEKA NWADIOKE

The Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA) has warned presidential candidates against participating in an “interactive session” scheduled for today by a The Platform Nigeria, saying the programme “does not meet with the approval of the ECNBA.”

In an email obtained by CITY LAWYER, the electoral body cited its earlier statement on the matter as well as provisions of the NBA Constitution (as amended), saying: “For the avoidance of doubt and as previously communicated to the Presidential Candidates, the proposed advertised interactive session for NBA Presidential Candidates organized by The Platform Nigeria, scheduled to hold on Sunday 19th July 2020, does not meet with the approval of the ECNBA.”

A source familiar with the operations of the electoral committee told CITY LAWYER yesterday that the committee had decided to deal decisively with the recurring issue of campaign debates, saying: “The committee will take a step to stop the recurrence of these issues. They are already working on something.”

CITY LAWYER had in its report noted the anxiety among Bar Leaders over the proposed interactive session, even as there were feelers that at least one of the presidential candidates had opted to shun the programme.

Below is the full text of the ECNBA email.

Dear Sir/Madam,

It has come to the attention of the ECNBA that Candidates in the NBA National Elections have been engaged in various forms of electioneering campaigns without regard to the provisions of the NBA Constitution 2015 (as amended) and the guidelines set out by the ECNBA.

We would like to draw your attention to the provisions of the NBA Constitution, the ECNBA Election Guidelines and ECNBA Statement No. 014 which clearly prohibit any form of campaign, save for that which is provided for in the Constitution.

For the avoidance of doubt and as previously communicated to the Presidential Candidates, the proposed advertised interactive session for NBA Presidential Candidates organized by The Platform Nigeria, scheduled to hold on Sunday 19th July 2020, does not meet with the approval of the ECNBA.

We count on your usual understanding and cooperation as we strive to carry out a respectable and responsible electoral exercise for our dear profession.

Accept the professional regards of the ECNBA.

Cordelia U. Eke
Secretary

Copyright 2020 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

ECNBA PUBLISHES CANDIDATES’ MANIFESTOS ON NBA WEBSITE

BY EMEKA NWADIOKE

The Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA) has published the manifestos of candidates for the forthcoming NBA Elections on the association’s website, exactly 21 days prescribed by the NBA Constitution (as amended). The manifestos are hosted here.

Paragraph 2.3(h) of the Second Schedule to the NBA Constitution provides that “The Electoral Committee shall collate all materials, arrange them in alphabetical order without regard for the position being sought and publish them in an electronic Election Magazine to be hosted on the NBA website at least twenty-one (21) days before the election.”

CITY LAWYER recalls that the electoral committee had in its ECNBA STATEMENT NO. 013 directed the candidates “to submit an A4 size copy of his/her curriculum vitae (of not more than 4 pages), a comprehensive manifesto and other campaign materials (all in electronic form) on or before 6:00PM on Monday 6th July 2020, for upload on the NBA website.” It added: “For the avoidance of doubt, campaigns can only be carried out by publication of campaign materials supplied to the ECNBA to be hoisted on the NBA website. Travelling across the country to solicit for votes is prohibited.”

Copyright 2020 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

‘You Have Not Been Fair to Us,’ Olanipekun Tells Mahmoud

Early signs that the forthcoming Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) will be explosive emerged yesterday as former NBA President, Chief Wole Olanipekun warned the Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud SAN-led NBA to shelve any plan to amend the association’s controversial constitution.

In a letter dripping with angst and discomfiture, the go-to lawyer expressed disappointment at the situation, adding that the NBA President had “not been fair” to the past NBA presidents and secretaries who admonished him to shelve the constitutional amendment project.

Below is the full text of the statement:

2nd August, 2018

Mr. A. B. Mahmoud, SAN
The President,
Nigerian Bar Association,
NBA House,
Plot 1101, Muhammadu Buhari Way,
Central Business District,
F.C.T. Abuja.

Dear Mr. President,

RE: AMENDMENT TO THE NBA CONSTITUTION
First and foremost, may I extend my professional and brotherly courtesies to you as our/my President.
You would recall that at the last meeting of past Presidents and Secretaries of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) called at your instance at Fraser Suites, Abuja on Friday, 20th July, 2018, you brought up, amongst others, your proposed amendments to the NBA constitution and apprised us of the far-reaching amendments being proposed by you on the eve of your departure, as the President of the foremost professional association in Nigeria. After a very extensive discussion on your proposals, and considering the depth and implications of such amendments, the meeting advised that you should shelve and/or put the proposals on hold, and allow your successor-in-office do further consultations on them, both at the National Executive Committee (NEC) and general levels and platforms, in order to adequately weigh the pros and cons of the proposed amendments before passing same. It was on this note that the meeting closed, and you did not disagree with the wise counsel.

Surprisingly, a notice or plan/intention to amend our constitution, as proposed and tabled by you at the meeting has now been sent out, and I must confess, I am in receipt of same, to the effect that the proposed amendments will be presented at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the NBA. I am taken aback by this development, and I kept on wondering why you ever brought up the topic at our meeting of Friday, 20th July,2018, if you knew you would not respect our opinion. Mr. President, you have not been fair to us, to put it mildly. As a person, I protest this attitude and action of yours. Needless reminding you, Mr President that the same meeting resolved a lot of burning issues to your advantage and satisfaction.

As agreed at the said meeting Mr. President, may I again advise and counsel that you put on hold the proposed constitutional amendments. No one possesses the monopoly of wisdom, and it is only courteous that you also respect the objections raised to some of your amendments at the meeting, despite the fact that some of us saw the proposals for the first time just at the meeting. No leader, however brilliant, industrious, good-intentioned or pragmatic can ever resolve all the problems of his association, society or country in his life time or within his tenure. You cannot be an exemption. Please let us learn from history; and be reminded that amendments to the NBA constitution should no longer be randomly done. I dare say that the proposed amendments, in some material particulars, will turn out to be an ill-wind, which will bring or blow in no fresh breath. You are advised not to force the amendments on our beloved Association at the AGM, which, with much respect, might be constituted in such a way that the attendees would not readily understand or appreciate the unending conundrum we will be plunged into if the amendments sail through. And in case you insist on going ahead to present the amendments at the AGM, can you be gracious enough, as a lawyer and leader, to circulate this letter of mine to the AGM.

Allow me to copy this letter to the past Presidents and Secretaries of the NBA.
Once again, Mr. President, accept my high regards.

I remain,

Your colleague and predecessor-in-office,

Chief Wole Olanipekun, OFR, SAN, LL.D, FCIArb., FNIALS.

CC:
Chief Richard Akinjide, CON, SAN
Chief (Mrs) Priscilla Kuye
Chief T.J.O. Okpoko, OON, SAN
C.J. Okocha, SAN
Chief Bayo Ojo, CON, SAN
Prince Lanke Odogiyan
Olisa Agbakoba, SAN
Chief Oluwarotimi Akeredolu, SAN
Joseph Bodunrin Daudu, SAN
Okechukwu Wali, SAN
Augustine Alegeh, SAN
Dele Adesina, SAN
Chief Isiaka Olagunju, Esq

Send your Press Statement, Events, News Tips, Opinions or Informed Commentary to citylawyermag@gmail.com
Follow us on facebook at City-Lawyer-Magazine

Copyright 2018 CITY LAWYER. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

‘We are studying ECNBA’s Revised Time Table,’ Says Osigwe

• Hints at Constitutional Crisis
• INJUNCTION: ‘I’m not Disappointed by September date,’
• Election without Prior NEC Approval Unconstitutional – Ukiri

The last may not have been heard on the much revised election time table rolled out by the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA). This is because some lawyers contend that the new time table is fraught with constitutional challenges, given that the NBA leadership did not obtain an approval of the National Executive Committee (NBA-NEC) prior to release of the revised time table. Continue Reading