The reported denial of entry to some Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) during the recent opening of the Legal Year and conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria at the Supreme Court is deeply troubling to me and others and deserves serious reflection.

Videos circulating online showed distinguished senior lawyers, fully robed and ready to attend the ceremony, stranded outside the hall, apparently helpless and unable to participate in an event celebrating their profession. I watched these scenes in Europe with profound embarrassment and sadness.

These were not ordinary spectators. They were officers of the court, members of the inner Bar and, in many cases, practitioners who have devoted decades to the administration of justice and the development of the legal profession.

Whatever the precise circumstances that led to this unfortunate situation, it raises a fundamental question: how could an event of such national and professional significance be organised in a manner that left some of its principal stakeholders unable to gain entry?

To be candid, a ceremony designed to celebrate the dignity of the legal profession must never become a source of embarrassment to its members.

The opening of the Legal Year and the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria are important institutional occasions. They celebrate professional excellence, the administration of justice and the enduring relationship between the Bench and the Bar.

Politicians, public officials, family members and friends of the new silks are welcome to attend and share in the celebration. However, accommodating all invited guests requires careful planning, effective coordination and a reliable admission process.

The recent incident to me appears to underscore the consequences of inadequate organisation. If organisers are aware that seating capacity is limited, they must anticipate attendance, coordinate invitations and accreditation, establish clear admission procedures and provide adequate guidance for guests.

A foreseeable challenge should not be allowed to degenerate into a spectacle in which senior lawyers are left stranded in corridors, fully robed, at an event organised to celebrate the legal profession. Good organisation is not an optional extra at a national judicial event; it is an essential part of the dignity of the profession.

For emphasis, the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria is one of the highest professional distinctions in the country. Many older silks have spent decades appearing before the courts, mentoring younger lawyers, serving professional associations and upholding the rule of law.

They are not entitled to preferential treatment merely because of their titles, but they deserve the consideration and respect due to every invited participant, particularly at an occasion of this significance. Their presence at the conferment ceremony represents more than attendance. It reflects professional solidarity, continuity and the transmission of the traditions of the Bar from one generation to another.

As the new silks deserve a dignified welcome, their senior colleagues deserve the opportunity to share in their joy. These objectives are complementary and should never be compromised by preventable administrative failures.

If you ask me, the issue is therefore not merely about access to a hall or the availability of seats. It concerns professional dignity, institutional respect and the message conveyed to younger lawyers and members of the public about the values of our esteemed profession.

The legal profession must not celebrate the elevation of some of its members while inadvertently humiliating others. So many senior advocates including an Attorney General of a State, I heard, were humiliated by being asked to exit the hall by officials of the Supreme Court. Why? How?

The Office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria and the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) should clarify what happened and explain the circumstances that led to the reported exclusion of some senior lawyers.
This is not a call to condemn anyone without hearing their side of the story. It is a call for accountability and improvement.

Was the expected attendance properly assessed? Were seating arrangements, accreditation and admission procedures adequately coordinated? Were sufficient measures in place to manage the movement of invited guests? These questions deserve answers, not to apportion blame unnecessarily, but to establish the facts and prevent a recurrence.

If we found out that inadequate planning or poor coordination contributed to the incident, the appropriate response should be an acknowledgement of the shortcomings and a clear commitment to correcting them in future.

Silence should not be the final response to an occurrence that has caused such visible embarrassment to the profession. A timely explanation and practical corrective measures would reassure the Bench and Bar that the lessons have been learnt.

The principal lesson of what transpired last Monday is clear to every one – organisation must be a top priority in every future conferment ceremony and major event of the legal profession.

Organisers must undertake realistic assessments of expected attendance, seating capacity and security requirements well in advance. Invitations and accreditation should be properly coordinated, admission protocols clearly communicated, and sufficient personnel deployed to manage entry and resolve difficulties.
There must also be contingency arrangements for unexpected attendance and other foreseeable challenges. Where capacity limitations make it necessary to restrict entry, the process must be orderly, transparent and respectful.

The success of a ceremony is measured not only by the distinguished personalities present or the grandeur of the proceedings, but also by the quality of its organisation and the dignity accorded to its participants.
The Supreme Court represents the apex of our judicial hierarchy. Its ceremonies should reflect the discipline, orderliness and professionalism expected of the institutions of justice.

When organisation fails, the embarrassment is visible; when it succeeds, the dignity of the institution is preserved.

I personally regard this incident as unfortunate and sincerely hope it remains an isolated occurrence in the history of the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria.

Repeated experiences of this nature could discourage older silks from attending future ceremonies. That would be regrettable, as their presence enriches the occasion and strengthens the bonds between generations of legal practitioners.

This moment should serve as one for reflection rather than recrimination. The Office of the revered CJN, the organisers and BOSAN should work to ensure that the shortcomings responsible for this unfortunate experience, if established, are addressed decisively.

Future ceremonies must be planned with the foresight, coordination and attention to detail they deserve. No invited Senior Advocate should be left stranded outside an event celebrating the profession because of avoidable organisational lapses.

The older silks deserve respect. The new silks deserve a dignified welcome. The Bench and the Bar deserve ceremonies that reflect their professional standing and institutional importance.

May this be the last time such an unfortunate incident occurs. Let future conferment ceremonies be remembered for their dignity, excellent organisation and professional fellowship, not for the embarrassment of those who came to honour the new silks and for the opening of the new legal year.
Enough said!

• Dr. Monday Ubani, SAN is a legal practitioner and public affairs commentator.

(C) CITY LAWYER Magazine. All rights reserved. To join our Channel, click here. Click here to join our WhatsApp chatroom. Contact us at citylawyermag@gmail.com or 081-3838-0083.