NBA PRESIDENCY: ‘WHY EGBE AMOFIN MUST CHANGE ITS FAILED STRATEGY,’ BY UDEMEZUE

ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS OF EGBE AMOFIN RESOLUTIONS IN NBA PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS: QUESTIONS FOR MY BELOVED FRIEND, OLAYINKA SOKOYA, ESQ

By Sylvester Udemezue

(A). STATEMENT BY LEARNED OLAYINKA SOKOYA

_”@⁨SYLVESTER UDEMEZUE (airtel)⁩y leader sir, all members of Egbe are bound by the constitution of Egbe Amofin Oodua and the resolution at the AGM. This resolution was reached at the AGM and I think the right thing for members to do is to abide by the resolution of the body they subscribed to even if it’s not favourable to them.”_

(B). MY HUMBLE RESPONSE

Thank you very much for your gracious reply. I am most grateful, Sir. However, I have a few concerns and would greatly appreciate your guidance on the following points:

1. Between a resolution of Egbe Amofin and the Constitution of the NBA, which takes precedence?

2. As you know, under the NBA Constitution, every lawyer from the Western Zone of the NBA (particularly from the South-West, whose turn it is by virtue of the internal rotation provisions) is entitled, if constitutionally qualified, to contest for the office of NBA President in 2026. Can Egbe Amofin, by any resolution passed at any of its forums, validly restrict the right of any such qualified lawyer from the West to contest?

3. What is the constitutional validity of any Egbe Amofin resolution that purports to prevent a qualified lawyer from the Western Zone (especially the South-West) from contesting the NBA Presidency in 2026?

4. Do you not think that the principle of ultra vires may apply here, especially because, while I agree with you that all members of Egbe Amofin are bound by its Constitution and resolutions, this would only hold where Egbe Amofin is reasonably shown to have acted intra vires?

5. Would it not be more strategic for Egbe Amofin at this stage to:

(a) insist on strict enforcement by the NBA leadership of the constitutional provisions on the internal rotation of the NBA Presidency, which, by all interpretations, favours the South-West producing the next NBA President in 2026;

(b) enter into constructive and fraternal engagement with the Mid-West Bar Forum, persuading them to refrain from fielding candidates in 2026, thereby leaving the field open for the South-West, while allowing all qualified aspirants from the South-West to freely contest?

6. My dear Mr. Sokoya, the right to elect the NBA President in 2026 belongs to all eligible lawyers from the 36 states of Nigeria and the FCT, not exclusively to members of Egbe Amofin. Could it not then be said that Egbe Amofin lacks the locus to dictate to all Nigerian lawyers who should be their NBA President in 2026? By adopting Mr. Akinboro, SAN, and directing other aspirants to step aside, does this not amount, in effect, to Egbe Amofin purporting to select the NBA President for the 2026–2028 term/tenure? I agree that it is the South-West’s turn, but that only means the NBA President must be elected from the South-West, not by only the South-West. The correct interpretation of the NBA Constitution is that members of the NBA should elect a President from the South-West, not that Egbe Amofin should select and present one for the entire association. Would you not agree, Sir?

7. Why then should Egbe Amofin continue to apply the same approach whenever it is the West’s turn to produce the NBA President, yet expecting a different result? If the same method has been used repeatedly without producing the desired outcome, is it not time to try a different approach?

8. These questions are addressed to you personally, but by extension they are also directed at Egbe Amofin. George Santayana’s words remain true: “Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat its mistakes.” Nothing will change unless we change our methods. We all know the right thing to do; the real challenge is summoning the will to do it.

I am grateful in anticipation of your gracious response, which will help advance this important discussion.

Yours faithfully,
Sylvester Udemezue (Udems)

Sylvester Udemezue (Udems) is the Proctor at The Reality Ministry of Truth, Law and Justice (TRM). He can be reached at udems@therealityministry.ngo
The views expressed in this article are entirely those of the author and do not represent the opinion of CITY LAWYER or its publishers

____________________________________________________________________

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply