‘Bandit’ Lawyers and the 2022 NBA Conference 

Conference Materials

Like almost everything else in Nigeria, the standard of decorum of legal practitioners and in the legal profession generally, including the actual practice of law, I’m sad to admit, has fallen possibly to an all time low. And, unfortunately, a sample of this decline was witnessed not just by Lawyers, but by the general public during the just concluded 2022 NBA AGC (Nigerian Bar Association Annual General Conference).

The term ‘Conference Materials’, generally means the items that are given to Conferees (obviously funded by their registration fees), subsequent upon registration for and attending a particular conference. One of the most popular items generally used as conference materials, are all kinds of bags in different shapes and sizes. 

For the NBA,’Conference Materials’ for the AGCs which have mostly always been a source of controversy, have ranged from bags to folders, to the extremely contentious ‘Tablet’ of the 2017 AGC, to even young female junior Lawyers, who some senior Lawyers stand accused of sexually harassing whilst they are out-of-station for the few days attending the NBA AGC. However, even the non-availability of the 2017 controversial Tablet (pronounced ‘Tabelet’ in Nigerian parlance), a Tablet being a device like an iPad, did not result in the disgraceful looting/burglary of the Registration booth that took place last Tuesday during the AGC to steal conference materials, the highlight of which was a black knapsack/backpack, akin to what children carry as their school bag. 

Criminal Behaviour 

Aside from the fact that burglary/stealing, assault, stealing with violence, robbery are offences that contravene the Criminal Law of Lagos State (CLLS), and upon conviction, are punishable with various terms of imprisonment (up to 21 years imprisonment) – see Sections 168-173, 278, 279, 285, 294 & 295 of the CLLS (also see on the definition of stealing Oyebanji v State (2015) LPELR-24751 (SC) per Galadima JSC; Aruna & Anor v State (1990) LPELR-568 (SC) per Nnaemeka-Agu JSC); on the ingredients of the offence of stealing, see Onwudiwe v FRN 2006 10 N.W.L.R. Part 988 Page 382 at 429 per Niki Tobi JSC); such criminal and disgraceful behaviour is thoroughly against the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (RPC) contained in the Legal Practitioners Act 2007. Section 1 of the RPC clearly provides thus:

“A Lawyer shall uphold and observe the rule of law, promote and foster the cause of justice, maintain a high standard of professional conduct, and shall not engage in any conduct which is unbecoming of a legal practitioner”. 

Clearly, stealing is not only unprofessional conduct, unbecoming of a Lawyer; it is a criminal act. And, anyone that is found to be part of what transpired, should not only be disciplined accordingly  by the NBA, but also prosecuted in a court of competent jurisdiction. 

My Idea of Conference Materials: The Takeaway

Personally, the most important conference material for me, is always my takeaway from the conference, that is, what I learn from the sessions that I attend, and not the bags or gifts.

Opening Ceremony

Outgoing NBA President’s Address

The outgoing President of the NBA, Olumide Akpata, in his Address, remarked about the dual role of the NBA. Firstly, the NBA’s mandate to deal with the issues of the legal profession; and secondly, a mandate to intervene in the affairs of our society, like ensuring that the rule of law is upheld and being the voice of the voiceless. I think Mr Akpata’s administration made quite an impact in playing these roles, and we expect Mr Maikyau to continue on this path.

The Keynote Speaker: Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie 

I thoroughly enjoyed the Keynote Address in which Chimamanda Adichie started with the terms ‘troublesome and innovative’, and how they could be applied to the NBA. She explained how the term troublesome could have positive connotations; for example, those who have abused their positions of power in Nigeria calling the NBA troublesome (obviously for its interventions). She used graphic examples to show how those who may stand for positive change in society, are seen as ‘troublesome’ by the establishment, including how the Priest in the Catholic Church that conducted her beloved Mother’s funeral service treated her rather badly, because she had stated previously in an interview or so, that the Church had become materialistic. In my mind, I immediately drew a parallel between the Priest’s negative reaction to Chimamanda because of her comment, and how government officials and APC members react to constructive criticism! She talked about those who use the instrumentality of the law to oppress fellow citizens, and the sweeping aside of injustice in the name of peace, concluding that such peace can only be fragile and hollow. I concur.

The 2023 Presidential Candidates 

The 2023 Presidential candidates also took the stage. Inter alia, Dumebi Kachikwu of the ADC shared his thoughts on security, while Senator Shettima talked about increasing the Defence budget. Increasing the Defence budget may be a given, and one expected Shettima and the other candidates to discuss other angles on how they actually intend to fight insecurity, apart from more funding (without necessarily revealing their intimate plans); after all, with all the increase in Defence expenditure, Nigerians are less safe than they were in 2015 – the insecurity problem also requires strategy. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar articulated some of his thoughts on how power should be devolved to the States (restructuring), and the abolition of the multiple exchange rates that we have in the country. Peter Obi repeated his now popular slogan of moving Nigeria “from consumption to production”, to rebuild the Nigerian economy. He however, did not say how he intends to achieve this. Adewole Adebayo of the SDP, blamed most of Nigeria’s woes on rotation of the same leadership in different political parties, saying that making a generational and attitudinal change was necessary going forward, while Prof Umeadi of APGA talked about respecting the laws that guide elections to get a good outcome. To tell the truth, I felt that the candidates did more of stating and analysing Nigeria’s problems, and less about viable, practical solutions. 

What stuck out like a sore thumb to me was that, with all the issues plaguing the Justice sector – inadequate pay and poor conditions of service for judicial officers; lack of respect for the rule of law, particularly amongst government agencies and officials; lack of effective Police reform; prison congestion; prison breaks; clogged up court system and the slow pace of the wheels of justice; non-digitalisation of the courts etc – at the biggest forum for Lawyers, not just in Nigeria but in Africa, the Presidential candidates were not asked and neither did they address any issue remotely relating to the administration of justice sector, and what they intend to do to improve same. The Judiciary is the third arm of government, and as important as it is, it never really features in campaigns, and certainly did not feature in this event, despite the fact that two of the candidates, Adebayo and Umeadi are Lawyers. We certainly did not see any indications or plans for a ‘Bold Transition’, as far as the Justice Sector is concerned.

Day 3: Plenary Session 1

Out of the sessions that I attended, there were two which I particularly enjoyed; and they took place on Day 3 of the Conference – ‘Impact of ACJA on the Administration of Criminal Justice’, moderated by the Guru of Reform of the Administration of Justice Sector, Attorney-General of Ekiti State, Olawale Fapohunda, SAN (ACJA is Administration of Criminal Justice Act). 

My takeaway from this session was that, unfortunately, a few States (between three and six out of 36 States) are yet to pass their own ACJL. However, Ekiti State may have gone further than most other States, in amending their ACJL to make it work even better. For instance, in order to stop the Police bypassing the DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions) – that is, without forwarding a case file to the DPP for advice, going directly to a Magistrate to obtain a remand order which can result in suspects being kept in custody for prolonged periods of time without the DPP ever knowing, or remanding individuals who should not be charged at all, Ekiti State amended Section 264 of its ACJL to provide that a Magistrate must see proof of receipt of the certified true copy of the case file by the DPP, before entertaining any request for a remand order; a measure geared at safeguarding people’s right to liberty guaranteed by Section  35 of the 1999 Constitution. I think this Ekiti State’s innovative amendment, should be emulated by all the States.

Of course, there is still room for improvement with ACJA/ACJLs. Outcomes still need to be monitored, like why there are still so many people awaiting trial, overcrowding of prisons etc. 

Day 3: Breakout Session

The other session that I found engaging was the Section on Public Interest & Development Law‘s (SPIDEL) ‘Consequences of Undermining the Judiciary Uner Our Democracy’ moderated by Dr Monday Ubani, the Chairman of SPIDEL. 

In the face of Inibehe Effiong’s committal to prison by the Chief Judge of Akwa Ibom State purportedly for contempt of court (he was released on Friday), FF (as Dr Ubani fondly referred to him) (Femi Falana, SAN) gave various examples on how, ironically, judicial officers themselves are undermining the judicial process, in this instance, by charging people for contempt when there is none. We learnt from FF’s submissions that some judicial officers do not exercise their discretion judicially and judiciously in this regard, and hold Lawyers for contempt in facie curiae (contempt in the face of the court), when there has not been any contemptuous conduct. 

For example, the Judge holds Counsel in contempt, because he doesn’t like the fact that he has been asked to recuse himself from a matter. See Franklin Atake v AGF & Anor 1982 13 N.S.C.C. Page 444 at 469-470 & Balogh v St Alban’s Crown Court (1975) 1 Q.B.D. 73 that the power of a Judge to commit an individual for contempt of court, must not be exercised frivolously or arbitrarily. 

FF gave us an example of a case where a Judge was asked to recuse himself from a case, after a litigant donated a huge amount of money at the Judge’s book launch. Naturally, opposing counsel felt that his client wouldn’t get justice in that court, on the ground that he was likely to be biased in favour of the litigant-donor. The Judge took exception to the request for recusal, and cited the Counsel for contempt. See the case of Deduwa v Okorodudu & Ors 1976 1 N.M.L.R. 237; Adebesin v State (2014) LPELR-22694 (SC) per Ngwuta JSC on bias. 

In another matter, FF told the court that he didn’t have access to his client who was in custody, and he needed to confer with his client before the matter proceeded. The Judge ordered FF to proceed with the case without seeing his client, and under the circumstances, FF then applied to the court to withdraw his appearance as Counsel in the matter; the application was granted and FF left the court room. Subsequently, a newspaper reported that FF stormed out of the court, and on the basis of the news report, FF was summoned back to face contempt charges! 

We also learnt that every citizen including Counsel, has a right to remain silent in court and not answer a question put to him or her, even by the judicial officer hearing the case; especially irrelevant questions that are designed to embarrass Counsel like “when were you called to the Bar?”. FF cited the case of Candide-Johnson v Edigin (1990) LPELR-20108 (CA), a case which we should all know by heart, in support of this position; where the Court of Appeal held inter alia that, the twin elements of contempt of court are interference and disrespect. In that case, a Magistrate in Kano asked Mr Candide-Johnson when he was called to the Bar. He refused to answer and was cited for contempt and convicted. The Court of Appeal, overturned the conviction, referred to such questions as “unnecessary extra-judicial verbal exchange”, and the invocation of contempt of court in this instance, as an abuse of judicial authority.

Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN talked about a constitutional amendment to separate the office of the Attorney-General from that of the Minister of Justice, so that the former can see himself as nothing but a servant of the law acting in the interest of the public, and not that of the government. More importantly, he asked that government, both Federal and State, make budgetary allocation for the payment of judgement debts, since it is inevitable that litigants will secure judgements against them.

Joseph Otteh of Access to Justice, identified the problem of the independence of the courts as undermining the justice delivery, while Dr Uju Agomoh submitted that we are obsessed with imprisonment, and created awareness of the plight of those who are mentally ill  (some not necessarily having committed any crime, but have been consigned there by their families who are ashamed of them) being kept in prison (in one case, for 24 years), which does not have the proper facilities to cater for them.

Conclusion 

The 2022 AGC concluded on Friday with the swearing in of the new President of the NBA, Yakubu C. Maikyau, SAN, and the new Executive. Going forward, we wish them a successful tenure in office. All in all, we must not let the shameful looting of conference materials, mar the otherwise successful 62nd NBA AGC.