‘BE ACCOUNTABLE TO MEMBERS,’ GADZAMA URGES NBA BRANCH LEADERS

Former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) presidential candidate, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama, SAN has urged NBA branch leaderships to be accountable and display positive leadership, adding that these attributes are the life wire of the legal profession.

Gadzama stated this while receiving a delegation of NBA Gombe Branch led by its Executive Committee in his Abuja law office.

The leading arbitrator and Chairman of the Mentorship Committee of the Body of Benchers (BOB) urged the Executive Committee not to relent in its role as branch officers who are expected to continually uphold the enviable standard of ethics and prestige for which the profession has become known.

He thanked the branch leadership “for always promoting the interest of the profession and for the courtesy visit.”

In his response, the leader of the delegation and NBA Gombe Branch Chairman, Mr. Haruna Yelma said the visit was “to identify with the Learned Silk who is one of our own.”

He thanked Gadzama for the warm reception accorded the delegation and the “invaluable words of wisdom,” and urged him not to be weary in supporting the branch.

He also commended the leading lawyer “for your continuous unwavering support and immense contributions to the Branch as well as the legal profession at large.”

CITY LAWYER gathered that the delegation had “fruitful discussions” with Gadzama before they parted.

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.

WHY COURT OF APPEAL JUSTICES MUST NOT ACT IN VAIN

The appointment of the latest batch of Court of Appeal Justices has been strewn with controversies, not least the claim that the interviews conducted by the National Judicial Council was perhaps shambolic. Just when justice sector stakeholders thought that the ghost of the troubled exercise was to be laid to rest with the scheduled swearing-in of the justices, the ceremony was postponed indefinitely ostensibly to enable the new justices “clear their desks in their various offices.” In this piece, KAYODE OGUNDAIRO posits that on the strength of the undisturbed judgement of the Supreme Court in OGBUNYIYA v OKUDO, any judicial acts done by the justices after their appointments would be a nullity and liable to being set aside on appeal.

The indefinite postponement of the swearing-in of the newly appointed justices of the Court of Appeal came to many as a shock, not least because of the reason adduced for the aborted exercise. This is a purely judicial matter outside the remit of the National Judicial Council (NJC).

If “clear their desks in their various offices to ensure that there are no outstanding issues before they assume their new responsibilities” suggests that the Justices should proceed to deliver judgments/rulings or discharge any other judicial role in the Federal High Court/High Court/ National Industrial Court under the guise of ‘clearing their desks”, that would, with great respect, amount to an exercise in futility on the strength of OGBUNYIYA v OKUDO (1979) 9 SC 32 as recently reinforced by UDEOGU v FRN.

OGBUNYIYA v. OKUDO dealt with provisions impari materia with ss. 283(2) and 290(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which are crystal clear.

238 (2): “The appointment of a person to the office of a Justice of the Court of Appeal shall be made by the President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council”.

290 (1): A person appointed to any judicial office shall not begin to perform the functions of that office until he has declared his assets and liabilities as prescribed under this Constitution and has subsequently taken and subscribed the Oath of Allegiance and the Judicial Oath prescribed in the seventh Schedule to this Constitution.

In OGBUNYIYA v OKUDO, the submission of Chief F.R.A. Williams on behalf of the Appellants, was that by virtue of the appointment of Nnaemeka-Agu J. (as he then was) as expressed in Exhibit SC.1, he ceased to be a Judge of the High Court of Anambra State on the 15th June, 1977, two days prior to delivery by him of the judgement on appeal.

The reaction of Mr. Afolabi Lardner (of counsel) for the Respondents was that until the Learned Judge was sworn in as Justice of the Court of Appeal, he was precluded by virtue of Section 128 of the Constitution of the Federation No. 20 of 1963 from entering upon the duties of his office, so that in the absence of evidence that he had on or prior to the 17th of June, 1977 been sworn in as a Judge of the Federal Court of Appeal, he was on that date still a Judge of the High Court of Anambra State.

The Supreme Court construed Section 128 of the Constitution of the Federation No. 20 of 1963 as amended by section 1(c) of the Schedule to The Constitution (Amendment) (No. 2) Decree No. 42 of 1976 (impari materia with s. 290(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended) which made it imperative that “a Judge of the Federal Court of Appeal” shall not enter upon the duties of his office unless he has “taken or subscribed the Oath of Allegiance and such oath for the execution of the duties of his office as may be prescribed by Parliament”.

Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court set aside the judgment delivered by Justice Nnaemeka-Agu (after his appointment as JCA but before he took the requisite oath) and ordered a trial de novo.

The Supreme Court held thus:

“A close look at Section 128 of the Constitution (No. 20 of 1963) as amended by the Schedule to Decree No. 42 of 1976 shows clearly that the section is intended to lay down a condition precedent to the functioning but NOT the appointment of a Judge. That section impliedly recognises the fact of appointment (already as a Judge) of the incumbent of that public office but makes the swearing of the prescribed oaths condition precedent to his functioning in that office. The language of the section reads:
“A Judge of the Supreme Court, Federal Court of Appeal and of the High Court of Lagos NOT a person appointed to be a Judge of the Supreme Court, Federal Court of Appeal and of the High Court of Lagos shall not enter upon the duties of his office (not, be it noted, enter upon his office) unless he has taken or subscribed the Oath of Allegiance and such oath for the due execution of his office as may be prescribed by (Italics supplied by Court).
… The language of section 128 aforesaid is directed to the entering by a judge (not by a judge designate) upon the duties of his office (not, upon his office).

This should ordinarily rest the matter.

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.

ANANABA, UBANI, ESAN INVITE DELEGATES TO SPIDEL CONFAB

The arrow-heads of the eagerly awaited Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL) Annual Conference have extended invitations to prospective delegates to attend the forthcoming conference.

In separate colourful video skits, NBA-SPIDEL Chairman, Prof. Paul Ananaba SAN; former NBA 1st Vice President and Conference Planning Committee Chairman, Mr. Monday Onyekachi Ubani as well as Alternate Chairman of the Local Organising Committee (LOC) and NBA Ibadan Chairman, Mr. Olayinka Esan all assured delegates that the conference promises to be intellectually rewarding aside from several sideline fun activities.

This year’s annual conference is scheduled to hold in the ancient city of Ibadan between May 23 and 26, 2021. The theme of the conference is “The role of public interest in governance in Nigeria.” CITY LAWYER gathered that while a Welcome Cocktail will be hosted by the Chief Judge of Oyo State, Justice Munta Abimbola  on May 23, the technical sessions will hold on May 24 and 25 alongside fully sponsored lunches for delegates by Prince Lateef Fagbemi SAN and Chief Niyi Akintola SAN. A reception is also to be hosted by Chief Bolaji Ayorinde SAN while Mr. Oladipo Olasope SAN is anchoring yet another luncheon for delegates alongside a planned picnic.

Leading human rights activists and influential state actors among others have all confirmed attendance at the annual conference. To register, click on https://nbaspidel.ng/nba-spidel-conference/ or call 0806-956-6120.

Below are the video skits. 

 

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.

NBA VP HEADS SPIDEL ELECTORAL COMMITTEE

  • AS ANANABA IS SET TO BOW OUT AFTER SPIDEL REVIVAL

The Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL) has set up a 9-member Electoral Committee to midwife the next leadership for the section.

A statement by the NBA-SPIDEL Council Chairman, Prof. Paul Ananaba SAN named fiery human rights activist and current NBA First Vice President, Mr. John Aikpokpo-Martins as the Chairman of the Electoral Committee. Mr. Chisom Onuoha is to act as the committee’s Secretary.

Other members of the committee are Funmi Adeogun Esquire, Godspower Edoga Esquire, Emeka Eze Esquire, Daniel Asomeji Esquire, Rabiu Ayuba Esquire, Akintayo Akinyemi Esquire, and Umoru Jibrin Esquire.

The committee has the mandate to conduct election of the section leading to the emergence of a new team to spearhead the activities of the resurgent section.

It is recalled that Prof. Ananaba has been instrumental in reviving the then moribund section after it became comatose for several years. The section – which is one of only three NBA sections – organisaed the much-talked-about Annual Conference at Aba, Abia State in November 2019.

The Ananaba Administration is on the verge of holding another landmark annual conference in Ibadan, Oyo State. Given the array of famous speakers that have confirmed participation at the conference and the strong support of key stakeholders, the conference promises to be widely attended and discussed for years to come. It is the first NBA-led in-person conference for almost two years since the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic.

The conference has as its theme, “The role of public interest in governance in Nigeria.” Registration for the conference opened early in the year at https://nbaspidel.ng/nba-spidel-conference/, while early bird registration closes on May 15, 2021.

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.

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.

ANNUAL CONFAB: SPIDEL INVITES EXHIBITORS TO REGAL 2,000 DELEGATES

The Central Planning Committee (CPC) for the eagerly awaited Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL) Annual Conference has invited exhibitors to add more value to the conference by providing services to conferees.

A statement today by the Media & Publicity Sub-committee said: “We therefore write to invite you to showcase your Company during the conference through exhibition and screen adverts on montage during the conference which will garner over 2,000 participants.”

The statement added that there are “limited booths” available for hire and urged potential exhibitors “to clearly write the name of their company and the amount on the teller. Payment should be made on or before the 15th May, 2021.”

It is recalled that many leading speakers have been lined up for the first-ever in-person annual conference since the corona virus pandemic, with many conferees very eager to reconnect with peers among others at the world-class Jogor Centre, Ibadan, Oyo State.

To register for the conference, please click on https://nbaspidel.ng.

The full text of the message is below:

Dear Sir/Madam,

THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION SECTION ON PUBLIC INTEREST AND DEVELOPMENT LAW 2021 ANNUAL CONFERENCE: INVITATION FOR EXHIBITION AND ADVERTS.

We write to inform you of the NBA-SPIDEL forthcoming Annual Conference 2019 which comes up from the 23rd to 26th of May, 2021 at the world-class Jogor Centre, Ibadan, Oyo State with the theme, “The Role of Public Interest in Governance in Nigeria”.

In the NBA there are 3 Sections to which the over 140,000 members of the Association belong; they are (i) Section on Legal Practice, (ii) Section on Business Law and (iii) Section on Public Interest and Development Law. The activities of the NBA are structured through these Sections.

We therefore write to invite you to showcase your Company during the conference through exhibition and screen adverts on montage during the conference which will garner over 2,000 participants.

The exhibition and advert rates are as follows;

1. EXHIBITION BOOTHS
Regular Booth: 3/3 metres – N80,000
Premium Booth: 3/6 metres – N150,000
VIP Booth (only 2) – N100,000

2. SCREEN ADVERTS/MONTAGE
25 seconds screen advert on montage– N80,000 (Eighty Thousand Naira)

40 seconds screen advert on montage– N120,000 (One Hundred and Twenty Thousand Naira)

60 seconds screen advert on montage- N150,000 (One Hundred and Fifty Thousand Naira)

3. ADVERT RATE FOR CONFERENCE LANYARD: N1,000,000 (One Million Naira)

NOTE: There are limited booths and interested exhibitors should ensure to clearly write the name of their company and the amount on the teller. Payment should be made on or before the 15th May,2021 to:

Bank Name: Access Bank

Account Name: Nigerian Bar Association (SPIDEL) Account

Account Number: 0775676671

Upon Payment, kindly scan and send proof of payment to info@nbaspidel.ng and copy nbaspidel@nigerianbar.org.ng

The content of the email should state the name of the company, the phone number of the contact person and details of the staff (maximum four persons) that will be in the booth. For further enquiries contact Edidiong Peter – 08069566120

Accept the assurances of our highest regards as we look forward to hearing from you soonest.

Thank you.
NBA-SPIDEL

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.

OPUTA MENTORING: CJ, GADZAMA, AGABI, NGIGE, OTHERS LIFT YOUNG LAWYERS

J-K Gadzama LLP has held its 6th edition of the “Honourable Justice Chukwudifu Oputa JSC Professional Training and Mentoring Programme for Young Lawyers.”

The event which held between April 23 and 25 was chaired by the Chief Judge of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Hon. Justice Salisu Garba while Chief Kanu Godwin Agabi (SAN, CON), former Attorney General and Minister of Justice of the Federation, delivered the Keynote Address.

The discussants included Mr. Muyiwa Oyetola Atoyebi (SAN), the youngest recipient of the rank of senior advocate and Managing Partner at Omaplex Law firm; Mrs. Dianne Okoko (FCIArb), Partner at Marcus Okoko & Co.; Mrs. Toyin Bashir, Partner at Banwo and Ighodalo, and Mr. Darlington Onyekwere, Partner at J-K Gadzama LLP. The hybrid event was well attended by lawyers who fell within the range of zero to 10 years at the Bar.

Participants were treated to a networking cocktail on Day One of the mentorship programme while Day Two witnessed the main event which was the mentoring and training programme. Curtains were drawn on the well-attended programme on Day Three with a breakfast session. The event was held under strict COVID-19 protocols.

In his opening remarks, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama (SAN), the host and initiator of the mentorship programme, noted that young lawyers need to be treated better, and advised them to work hard, persevere and utilize their networks to build a successful legal practice.

In his address, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN) urged the lawyers to persist within the profession despite the gloomy appearance. He urged the participants to strive to add value before aspiring for financial largesse.

On his part, a representative of Justice Hassan Baba urged the lawyers to work diligently and await the rewards, which would surely come.

A cross section of participants at the mentoring programme
A cross section of participants at the mentoring programme
L - R: Mr Daniel Manasseh Tela, Secretary, Body of Benchers, Prof. Tahir Mamman SAN, Senior Partner at J-K Gadzama LLP, Mr Darlington Onyekwere, Partner at J-K Gadzama LLP, Mrs Toyin Bashir, Partner at Banwo and Ighodalo, Chief Kanu Agabi SAN, CON, the Keynote Speaker, Hon. Justice H. Baba, Mrs Dianne Okoko FCIArb., Partner at Marcus Okoko & co., Mr Oyetola Muyiwa Atoyebi, Managing Partner at Omaplex law firm and Joe-Kyari Gadzama SAN
L – R: Mr. Daniel Manasseh Tela, Secretary, Body of Benchers; Prof. Tahir Mamman SAN, Senior Partner at J-K Gadzama LLP; Mr. Darlington Onyekwere, Partner at J-K Gadzama LLP; Mrs. Toyin Bashir, Partner at Banwo and Ighodalo; Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN, CON), Keynote Speaker; Hon. Justice H. Baba; Mrs. Dianne Okoko (FCIArb), Partner at Marcus Okoko & Co.; Mr. Oyetola Muyiwa Atoyebi (SAN), Managing Partner, Omaplex law firm and Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama (SAN)
Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama SAN, the Principal Partner of J-K Gadzama LLP and Chief Emeka Ngige SAN, the Chairman of the Council of Legal Education during the networking cocktail.
Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama (SAN), Principal Partner, J-K Gadzama LLP and Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN), Chairman, Council of Legal Education during the networking cocktail.

A young lawyer asking a question during the session.

A young lawyer asking a question during the session. 

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.