Connect with us

Judiciary

LEAD YOUR SHEEP NOT INTO PERDITION, DEAR OSIGWE – Bayonle Beyioku

Published

3 weeks ago

on

Within the past four weeks, that is, between June 11 and July 12, 2026 — several developments have rapidly emerged within the NBA polity, the summary of which is as follows, according to the documents currently circulating all over social media:
i. Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice (HAGF), invited past Presidents of the Association from 1998 to a meeting in the Conference Room of the Federal Ministry of Justice, Abuja. The available Reports indicate that the meeting was convened on June 11, 2026, in relation to disputes arising from the forthcoming NBA national elections which have resulted to the institution of court actions.
ii. The HAGF, who presided over the meeting told attendees that the essence of convening the meeting was to prevent the Bar from further crisis arising from the campaigns for the 2026 General Elections and the institution of court actions. He urged attendees to make suggestions on the way forward so that the NBA could be spared the embarrassment of balkanisation.
iii. Each of the past Presidents and counsel present contributed to the discourse, at the end of which a 3-man Committee comprising Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN; Prince Lanke Odogiyon; and Paul Usoro, SAN, was set up to look into, among other matters, the cause or causes of the present conflicts within the NBA leading to the institution of the referenced cases, and to make appropriate recommendations on the way forward to the HAGF and Minister of Justice.
iv. The Committee swung into action almost immediately thereafter by calling for memoranda from interested parties, including parties in the pending cases, the three Presidential Candidates, the President of the NBA, the Chairman of the ECNBA, and the Mid-West Bar Forum. With the exception of the NBA President, Mrs. Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, and the Mid-West Bar Forum, every other invited person or body submitted a memorandum and appeared before the Committee, physically or virtually.
v. The Committee submitted its Report to the HAGF on 26th June, 2026, signed by two members, while the third member submitted a Minority Report on July 1, 2026.
vi. On July 6, 2026, The HAGF issued Directions pursuant to the Report submitted to him. Between July 6 and July 12, 2026, several sporadic and, in some instances, ill-digested reactions and commentaries greeted the HAGF’s Directions, particularly from Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, President of the NBA, who, on July 7, 2026, issued a press statement condemning the Directions wholesale, describing them as directives and contending that the HAGF lacked jurisdiction to issue them.
vii. On July 8, 2026, while appearing on Channels Television’s programme, “Politics Today,” anchored by Seun Okinbaloye, he descended heavily on the person and office of the HAGF, the Directions, and some eminent lawyers, including a former Attorney-General of Oyo State, who is an eminent Silk and one of Osigwe’s frontline supporters in 2024.
viii. Thereafter, on July 11, 2026, the NBA President invited European Union, the United States Embassy, the British High Commission, Yiaga Africa, the Transition Monitoring Group (TMG), and other reputable international and domestic election observers to monitor and observe the NBA 2026 elections. According to him, “The Association’s internal elections have consistently been conducted in a manner that reflects transparency, accountability, inclusiveness, and integrity…” Along the line, Amnesty International was reported to have condemned the Directions issued by the HAGF; but the African Bar Association promptly condemned Amnesty International’s statement as an “unwarranted intervention.”
In all these ferocious, voluminous, and somewhat rude, mischievous, and cruel attacks on the HAGF, and in the vilification of his person and office, none has squarely faulted the genuineness and imperativeness of the Directions. The arguments canvassed and the postulations espoused by the President of the NBA and his co-peddlers have no basis in law, logic, or morals, as will be demonstrated anon.
THAT THE HAGF HAS NO JURISDICTION TO ISSUE THE DIRECTIONS.
In his appearance on Channels Television on July 8, 2026, the NBA President stated, among other things, that the HAGF is merely a ceremonial leader of the Bar, that he had no jurisdiction to issue the Directions, and that he was biased.
It is rather surprising and baffling that a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, who is also the President of the NBA, could make such sweeping submissions to the general public, particularly to viewers of Channels Television worldwide. Apart from being a corporation sole, the office of the HAGF is an institution, and it is the only ministerial office expressly created by Section 150 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (as amended). The Attorney-General is a member of the Council of State and the Chairman of the Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy. During the military era, whoever was Attorney-General was made a member of the Supreme Military Council or the Armed Forces Ruling Council, depending on the nomenclature adopted by the military government of the day. The HAGF is also the Chairman of the General Council of the Bar, a Council to which the NBA contributes twenty representatives, including the President, the Secretary, and eighteen other members. Interestingly, the conditions for nominations and elections of members to the General Council of the Bar are comprehensively set out in the NBA Constitution itself, including payment of branch and national practising fees and membership of the NBA NEC for two years prior to the election. Elections to the General Council of the Bar are usually held at the same time as the NBA General Elections. See A.G. Federation v. ANPP & Ors. (2003) 18 NWLR (Pt. 851) 182.
It is rather mind-boggling that the HAGF could be described as the ceremonial head of the Bar by the NBA President. On the contrary, the HAGF is the official leader of the Bar in diverse capacities. While one is not submitting that the NBA should be surrendered to the HAGF, the legal reality remains that the NBA is part and parcel of the general Bar over which the HAGF is the official leader. The President of the Bar and the other nineteen representatives of the Association on the GCB submit themselves to the leadership and chairmanship of the HAGF on that Council. The HAGF is a statutory member of the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee, as well as a member of the Federal Judicial Service Commission. He recommends legal practitioners to the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for appointment into diverse offices, including Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Chairman of the Council of Legal Education, and Director-General of the Nigerian Law School. At any official, legal, or judicial event or programme, he takes precedence over the President of the Nigerian Bar Association. He may also initiate disciplinary proceedings against any President of the NBA where the law so permits.
ALL PAST PRESIDENTS AND PRESENT PRESIDENT OF THE NBA SUBMITTED TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE HAGF
At the meeting of June 11, 2026, the past Presidents and present President of the NBA who were present submitted to the jurisdiction of the HAGF. None of them protested in any way whatsoever about his jurisdiction to summon, preside over, or direct the meeting; instead, each spoke in turn, lauding the HAGF not just for convening the meeting, but for seeking to save the Bar from the crisis into which it had descended. The meeting decided to set up a 3-Man Committee to look into the cause or causes of the present conflicts within the NBA leading to the institution of the referenced cases, and to make appropriate recommendations on the way forward to the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice. The Report of the Committee was duly submitted to the HAGF, not in a ceremonial capacity, but in an official capacity, being the convener and Chairman of the meeting of June 11, 2026. The Report could not properly have been submitted to the President of the NBA. The HAGF received the Report in his official capacity and acted on it in the same capacity. Section 128(1) of the Evidence Act is clear on the exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence relating to official proceedings, transactions, or engagements, except where fraud, intimidation, illegality, or want of due execution is established.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE NBA, OR ANY OTHER ATTENDEE AT THE MEETING OF JUNE 11, 2026, IS ESTOPPED FROM CHALLENGING THE JURISDICTION OF THE HAGF TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS ON THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE.
By virtue of Section 169 of the Evidence Act, the NBA President, or any other participant at the meeting, is estopped from querying or challenging the jurisdiction of the HAGF to accept or act on the Report of the Committee set up under his aegis and with the consent of the attendees. By act or omission, the NBA President and others intentionally caused or permitted the HAGF to believe that none of them would challenge, controvert, or deny the resolution reached at the meeting of June 11, 2026, which gave birth to the 3-Man Committee and resulted in the Report upon which the HAGF issued Directions. In Agbogunleri v. Depo (2008) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1074) 217 at 233, the Court recognised the common-law classifications of estoppel: estoppel by quasi- record, estoppel by deed, and estoppel in pais. See also Joe Iga & Ors. v. Ezekiel Amakiri & Ors. (1976) 11 S.C. 1 at 12–13. In Adedeji v. National Bank of Nigeria Ltd. (1989) 1 NWLR (Pt. 96) 212 at 226, the Court held that: “It is morally despicable for a person who has benefited from an agreement to turn round and say that the agreement is null and void. In pursuance of the principle that law should serve public interest, the courts have evolved the technique of construction in bona partem. One of the principles evolved from such construction in the interpretation of statutes is that no one should be allowed to benefit from his own wrong…” The same equitable and public-interest logic applies here: a party who participated in, benefited from, or acquiesced in a process cannot approbate and reprobate when the outcome becomes inconvenient.
HAGF AS AN ARBITRATOR QUA MEDIATOR
The HAGF acted as an arbitrator and/or mediator at the meeting of June 11, 2026. Again, everyone present commended him highly for assuming this role. It is common knowledge that, by virtue of his office, the HAGF performs the roles and functions of an arbitrator, mediator, or both, from time to time, whether in relation to criminal matters, civil proceedings, commercial transactions, or the execution of documents. The parties over whom he performs these functions are not restricted; they may include natural persons, corporate entities, and associations, whether the NBA, NMA, ICAN, ARCON, COREN, ICBN or similar bodies. While the submission of the NBA President that the HAGF acted in a merely ceremonial manner is fallacious, even assuming that he did, the outcome remains binding on the NBA and its President, having submitted to that process.  In Awosile v. Sotunbo (1992) 5 NWLR (Pt. 243) 513 and Amadi v. Orlu (2023) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1904) 319 at 350, it was held that the report or judgment of customary arbitration is binding on parties who submitted to it, and none can resile from it merely because it is unfavourable. Stemming from the decision reached at the meeting of June 11, 2026, directing parties to seek adjournments in subsequent court proceedings in order to await the Report of the 3-Man Committee, and further to the submission of the Report, the first recommendation was that parties should withdraw all cases in court. That recommendation has now become Direction No. 1 of the HAGF. It would therefore be morally and legally untenable for any party to challenge either the Report or the Directions made pursuant to it.
NBA IS AN INCORPORATED TRUSTEE AND NOT MERELY A NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATION (NGO)
It has been misleadingly submitted in some quarters that the NBA is a mere NGO over which the HAGF cannot issue Directions. This is a convenient submission from those quarters, advanced in an attempt to rationalise legal and jurisprudential truisms. The NBA is an incorporated trustee, having been registered as such in 2004. The Corporate Affairs Commission can investigate the affairs of an incorporated trustee. The NBA derives much of its funds from the practising fees of members, which are administered in accordance with law. The NBA is mentioned in several statutes, particularly the Legal Practitioners Act. It nominates members to several official bodies, including the Body of Benchers and the Council of Legal Education. Under Section 6 of the Tribunals of Inquiry Act, the President may set up a commission of inquiry to inquire into any matter or thing, or into the conduct or affairs of any person, where such inquiry is for public welfare, whether the person or institution is public or private. The NBA falls within the class of institutions whose affairs may implicate public welfare. See Egbo v. Nwali (1998) 6 NWLR (Pt. 553) 195 at 207 and Ndoma-Egba v. Government of Cross River State (1991) 4 NWLR (Pt. 188) 773 at 788.
If what is going on in the NBA is not nipped in the bud, it may lead to a breakdown of law and order. This is more particularly so where the findings of the Committee reportedly revealed that the NBA has consistently conducted its affairs, especially its elections, in ways alleged to violate extant laws, including laws regulating digital identity and cyber-related processes. Assuming, for a fleeting second, that the NBA is an NGO, it is a unique NGO that enjoys several benefits and statutory flavours; and the law is clear that an institution that takes advantage of statutory benefits cannot shy away from the corresponding statutory responsibilities. By parity of reasoning, see Adedeji v. CBN (2023) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1878) 531 at 553; Omobare v. New Nigerian Bank (1986) 1 NLCC 32 at 36; Comptroller-General of Customs v. Gusau (2017) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1598) 353 at 388; and Olaniyan v. University of Lagos (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 9) 599.
A STITCH IN TIME SAVES NINE
Law, like nature, sometimes abhors a vacuum. The NBA is gradually moving towards a state of anomie. Rather than reprimanding the HAGF, who is trying to save the NBA from itself, the NBA should be sober and reflective enough to appreciate the relevance and importance of the HAGF’s Directions; it is a stitch in time. Rather surprisingly, and somewhat boisterously, the NBA President stated that the elections would go on come July 18, 2026, as though he is above the laws of the land or ignorant of them. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse: ignorantia facti excusat, ignorantia juris non excusat. See Pankshin v. State and Omowaiye v. A.G. Ekiti State.
By the National Identity Management Commission Act, 2007, it is arguable that the NBA election cannot be properly conducted without the use of the NIN, and any officer of the NBA, candidate, voter, service provider, or other person who participates in the conduct of the election without complying with applicable identity-verification requirements may be exposed to statutory consequences. Election rigging or manipulation is also a criminal offence punishable under other laws of the land. The Committee made several recommendations aimed at overhauling and recalibrating the NBA’s deficiencies and backlog of impunities. If one may ask, does the International Bar Association (IBA), which is the association of lawyers worldwide, invite observers to its elections? Has the Committee not recommended that the NBA should borrow from the seamless transmission of tenures from the IBA at the global level, as well as from other professional bodies in Nigeria, such as COREN, NMA, and ICAN? What is offensive in that? Has the Committee also not recommended that capable, proven, and tested service providers be recruited to conduct the election exercise, instead of unknown entities alleged to be tax defaulters and allegedly being conscripted by the NBA President and the Chairman of the ECNBA? One of the Presidential Candidates was recorded by the Committee as saying that participating in the election would amount to validating an already predestined candidate to be coronated. The other Presidential Candidate, according to the Report of the Committee, was equally profound in condemning the entire process, which both of them perceived as a grave abuse. Should the NBA, whose motto is “Promoting the Rule of Law,” not obey the laws of the land?
A plea and caution to the NBA President and his co-itinerants: the position of the NBA is like that of a bird perched on a thread; both the bird and the thread are in a state of unease. The stories of alleged criminal electoral activities within the NBA are now in the marketplace, and the stench is becoming cancerous. A Yoruba adage goes thus: “Kángùn, kángùn, kángùn, máa kángùn síbí kan,” literally translated as: “the fumble and tumble will certainly settle at an angle”. And to those who are quick to adopt any candidate at an election whose credibility, sanctity, bona fides, and due-process compliance have been seriously questioned, and in the face of extant Directions of the HAGF which have not been set aside, let us remember what the Holy Writ says: “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.” While it is not amusing to note that some columnists who described the 2018 election as a bitter pill now, for reasons known to them, see the already compromised 2026 elections as a tonic for the Eucharist, where then lies objectivity for the NBA? Should we continue with the established bazaar that has characterised NBA elections? Are the endorsers at home with what is contained in the Committee’s Report, as credited to one of the Presidential Candidates who appeared before it, that a particular former candidate demanded from him, among other things, a humongous sum, direct appointment as a Life Bencher, appointment into the NJC, and appointment as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria? What lessons are we handing over to the young lawyers among us? Let us remind ourselves that, within the past one week, over 7,000 lawyers were admitted to the Nigerian Bar. What message are we passing to them? Is the physician in the NBA ready to heal himself? And to Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, the President of the NBA: is he the reincarnation of the biblical Rehoboam?
Emphatically, and without any shred of reservation, the HAGF’s Directions are binding on every person concerned, including the NBA President, ECNBA members, all candidates in the forthcoming elections, all voters, service providers, and any person who participates in the process. Anyone who flouts them is toying with the laws of the land and with the authority of the HAGF, who is the Chief Law Officer of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and who acted, not in any private capacity, but in his official capacity. He was not on a frolic; he was on terra firma when he issued those Directions.
Bayonle is a legal enthusiast.
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Judiciary

BREAKING: Court Jails Chinese Nationals, Sentences Them to 50 Years for Illegal Export of Nigeria’s Lithium, Copper Minerals

Published

2 days ago

on

July 31, 2026

By

Justice Akintayo Aluko of the Federal High Court, Lagos, has convicted and sentenced two Chinese nationals, Zhang Hong Lin and Gao Pei Hai, to 25 years’ imprisonment each for conspiring to illegally export Nigeria’s mineral resources.

The judge convicted the two defendants on all five counts preferred against them and sentenced each of them to 25 years’ imprisonment on Counts 1 to 5, with an option of a ₦10 million fine on each count.

Counsel to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), H. U. Kofarnaisa, had arraigned the two defendants on Friday on a five-count charge.

Justice Aluko further ordered that the sentences should commence from the date of their arrest.

He also ordered the forfeiture of all the mineral resources involved in the case to the Federal Government.

The two convicts were arraigned alongside Gao Pei Yu, who remains at large, on a five-count charge bordering on conspiracy, unlawful possession, and the attempted exportation of strategic mineral resources without lawful authority.

According to the charge filed before the Federal High Court on May 28, 2025, the defendants conspired in Lagos to defraud the Federal Government of revenue accruing from the country’s solid mineral resources by attempting to export mica products, copper-bearing minerals, and lithium-bearing minerals without the approval of the appropriate authorities.

The prosecution alleged that the offences contravened Section 1(8)(a) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act, 1983.

The remaining counts alleged that, on May 9, 2025, the defendants unlawfully possessed various mineral resources intended for export without lawful authority, contrary to Section 8(b) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act, 1983.

The minerals listed in the charge included muscovite and lepidolite, both mica minerals; spodumene and petalite, which are lithium-bearing ores; as well as anhydrite, quartz, magnesite, bornite, and cuprite, which are associated with copper-bearing mineral resources.

After reviewing the evidence, Justice Aluko found that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the first and second defendants.

He consequently convicted them on all five counts, imposed the custodial sentences and fine options, and ordered the forfeiture of the seized mineral resources to the Federal Government.

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Court Jails Yahoo Boys’ Middleman, Four Men for Money Laundering, Illegal Forex Trading

Published

2 days ago

on

July 31, 2026

By

Justice Akintayo Aluko of the Federal High Court, sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos, on Thursday, July 30, 2026, convicted and sentenced Sunmonu Olasunkanmi Thaoban to four years’ imprisonment for money laundering.

Sunmonu was arraigned by the Lagos Zonal Directorate 1 of the EFCC on a two-count charge bordering on money laundering.

One of the counts reads: “That you, Sunmonu Thaoban Olasunkanmi, sometime in 2023, in Lagos and within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, whilst acting as a middleman, indirectly disguised the origin of the sum of ₦16,000,000 (Sixteen Million Naira), being illicit gains accrued from your unlawful act, by converting same to a black G-Wagon Jeep, 2018 model, with chassis number 1C4HJWEGJL893461, which vehicle forms part of the proceeds of your unlawful activity, and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(2)(a) and punishable under Section 18(3) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.”

The defendant pleaded guilty to both counts.

Following his guilty plea, the prosecution counsel, H. U. Kofarnaisa, reviewed the facts of the case and urged the court to convict and sentence him accordingly.

Justice Aluko found Sunmonu guilty and sentenced him to four years’ imprisonment, with an option of a ₦1.8 million fine.

The court also ordered the forfeiture of the convict’s black G-Wagon Jeep and mobile device to the Federal Government of Nigeria.

In a related development, the court also convicted and sentenced four Bureau de Change (BDC) operators to 12 months’ imprisonment each for engaging in illegal foreign exchange transactions.

The convicts—Umar Muhammad Lamido, Yusuf Musa Yusuf, Abdulmuhimin Mahmud, and Muhammed Musa—were prosecuted by the Lagos Zonal Directorate 1 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ikoyi, on separate one-count charges bordering on illegal foreign exchange operations.

One of the charges against Abdulmuhimin Mahmud reads: “That you, Abdulmumin Mahmud, on the 23rd of July, 2026, in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, engaged in a foreign exchange transaction other than through the official foreign exchange market and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 11(1)(a) of the National Economic Intelligence Committee Establishment (Etc.) Act, 1994, and punishable under Section 11(2) of the same Act.”

The defendants pleaded guilty to their respective charges.

Following their guilty pleas, the prosecution counsel, H. U. Kofarnaisa, reviewed the facts of the cases and urged the court to convict and sentence them accordingly.

Justice Aluko convicted the four defendants and sentenced each of them to 12 months’ imprisonment, with an option of a ₦100,000 fine.

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Agidingbi Land Row: Family Accuses OORBDA of Defying Supreme Court Judgment

Published

3 days ago

on

July 30, 2026

By

The Akinole-Oshiun Family has rejected the Ogun-Oshun River Basin Development Authority’s (OORBDA) claim to an 8,000-square-metre parcel of land along Lateef Jakande Road, Agidingbi, Ikeja, Lagos, insisting that the property has already been vested in the family by judgments of the High Court, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court.

The family made the assertion in a rejoinder dated July 31, 2026, in response to OORBDA’s public disclaimer published on Page 12 of The Punch newspaper of July 29, 2026, in which the authority claimed ownership of the property known as “AY Homes Luxury Court.”

Signed by the Head of the Family, Chief Isiaka Lamina Akiti Akinole, and the Family Secretary, Hon. Fatai Abayomi Gbadebo Oshiun, the rejoinder described OORBDA’s publication as “erroneous” and “misleading,” saying it was issued to set the record straight and prevent what it described as falsehood from gaining public acceptance.

According to the family, the disputed property forms part of about 398 acres of land in and around Agidingbi, which it said had been conclusively declared its property through judgments of the High Court of Lagos State, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court.

The family cited the decisions in Suit No. ID/216/77L, Appeal Nos. CA/L/517M/99, CA/L/649M/06, and CA/L/776/2014, as well as the Supreme Court judgment in SC/173/2009, which it said affirmed its legal and beneficial ownership of the land.

It further stated that, following the judgments, it obtained a writ of possession, which was executed by the Deputy Sheriff of the High Court of Lagos State in April 2019 in the presence of officers of the Nigeria Police Force, after which a Form “O” certifying the execution was issued.

The family also recalled that the execution of the writ prompted the Lagos State House of Assembly’s Committee on Rules and Business to conduct a public hearing on a petition over alleged illegal allocations of land covered by the Supreme Court judgment.

According to the rejoinder, officials of OORBDA participated in the hearing alongside other stakeholders, after which the Assembly resolved that the Lagos State Government should comply with the court judgments by recognising the family as the lawful owner of the 398-acre land and granting it unhindered access to the property.

The family further claimed that the Lagos State Government subsequently recognised its ownership by issuing land allocation documents, survey plans, building permits, and planning approvals covering plots within the Alausa Central Business District and along Lateef Jakande Road, including the disputed property.

It argued that OORBDA’s disclaimer was contemptuous of the subsisting judgments of superior courts and inconsistent with the state’s recognition of the family’s title.

The family also dismissed the Certificate of Occupancy displayed by OORBDA in its publication, contending that it could not supersede valid court judgments affirming the family’s ownership.

Urging members of the public, subscribers, consultants, agents, and other stakeholders to disregard OORBDA’s disclaimer, the family described the publication as self-serving, misleading, and capable of causing confusion and disrupting public peace in Agidingbi and its environs.

The rejoinder marks the latest development in the ownership dispute over the prime Agidingbi property. OORBDA had earlier warned the public against dealing with the land, maintaining that it belongs to the authority.

Efforts to obtain OORBDA’s response to the family’s rejoinder were unsuccessful as of the time this report was filed.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 JaraJournal.