*Says Chairmen Cherry-Picked NBA Constitution While Demanding Governor Obey His Own
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/TheNigerialawyer-WhatsApp-Channel1.jpg")
Victor Chima Nwaugo, a former National Legal Adviser of the Nigerian Bar Association and a member of the NBA Aba Branch, has issued a detailed critique of the communiqué released by five chairmen of NBA branches in Abia State following the ongoing JUSUN strike, challenging the procedural legitimacy of their resolutions, questioning why they demanded better pay for judiciary staff without addressing the “ceaseless extortion” of lawyers through illegal “bench fees,” and arguing that the chairmen’s role should be reconciliation between the government and JUSUN rather than threatening the government with mass protests.
In a statement issued in his personal capacity, Nwaugo, who served as NBA National Legal Adviser from 2010 to 2012, was a National Executive Council member from 2006 to 2014, and has held numerous other positions at branch and national levels, systematically dissected the communiqué signed by five chairmen — Charles N. Onuchukwu, Isaac Anya, Eze Nwaegoro, Kingsley A.O. Nwachi, and S.E. Elekeson — arguing that their resolutions suffer from constitutional irregularities, procedural shortcomings, and a one-sided approach to a dispute that has shut down the court system in Abia State for over a month.
The communiqué, dated April 29, 2026, was issued following a meeting of the NBA Body of Chairmen of Abia State held on April 28 at the Sir Eman Akwiwu SAN Bar Centre in Aba.
The five chairmen passed several resolutions including a demand that the Abia State Government grant financial autonomy to the state judiciary “without further delay,” a demand that funds due to the judiciary be paid directly to its official account from the consolidated revenue fund, and a warning that if the demands were not met within 14 working days, the Body of Chairmen would “mobilise lawyers in all the branches” to “stage a mass protest against the Abia State Government.”
Nwaugo’s most fundamental objection was constitutional. He argued that five chairmen meeting among themselves cannot pass resolutions that bind the entire membership of six NBA branches in Abia State without first calling meetings of those branches’ members.
He noted that Article 16(I)(ii) of the NBA Constitution 2015, as amended in 2021 and 2025, permits all branches in any state to hold “joint meetings or consultations to discuss matters of common interest for the overall good of the Association and its members.”
However, Nwaugo pointed out a critical distinction: the provision permits joint meetings of branches, not merely joint meetings of chairmen acting without their members’ mandate.
“At no time from 16th day of March 2026 when the JUSUN strike started till date has any meeting of members of six branches of NBA in Abia State been called, neither has NBA Aba Branch called any meeting scheduled to discuss the imbroglio between JUSUN and the executive arm of government of Abia State,” Nwaugo stated.
He charged that the five chairmen “convened a meeting within five chairmen of NBA branches in Abia State and took decisions to bind over one thousand other members of six branches of NBA, including Senior Advocates, Benchers and so many NBA leaders, without any meeting for such purpose, after which they passed a resolution binding all members of NBA branches in Abia State.”
The implication is clear: if the chairmen intended to mobilise lawyers for a mass protest, they should first have called meetings of their respective branches, obtained mandates from their members, and then issued resolutions reflecting the collective will of the membership. Instead, five individuals made decisions on behalf of more than a thousand lawyers who were never consulted.
Nwaugo deployed the chairmen’s own language against them in his most pointed observation.
The communiqué had stated that “the Abia State Government led by His Excellency Dr. Alex Otti should not be allowed to cherry-pick what aspect of the Nigerian Constitution to obey, neither should the Government set a particular time to obey the Constitution.”
Nwaugo turned the same standard on the chairmen themselves: “The five chairmen of the six branches of NBA in Abia State should not cherry-pick what aspect of the NBA Constitution to obey, neither should the five chairmen set a particular time to obey the NBA Constitution.”
The criticism highlights the irony of NBA leaders demanding constitutional compliance from the government while themselves failing to follow the constitutional processes of their own association. If the chairmen expect the governor to respect the constitutional provisions on judicial autonomy, they should equally respect the NBA constitutional provisions that require member consultation before taking binding decisions.
Nwaugo noted that there are six NBA branches in Abia State — Aba, Umuahia, Ohafia, Isi-Ala-Ngwa, Ukwa, and Bende — but only five chairmen signed the communiqué. The absence of the sixth chairman raises questions about whether the resolution enjoyed unanimous support even among branch leaders, let alone among the broader membership.
Nwaugo critiqued the chairmen’s approach to engaging the Abia State Attorney-General.
He noted that the Body of Chairmen mandated the Aba branch chairman to schedule a physical meeting with the AG on March 27, 2026, but “without proposing dates within which the AG may choose best suited for him for the said physical meeting.”
When the AG indicated he would be available for an online meeting rather than a physical one, the communiqué “did not capture whether the Attorney-General of Abia State was given the option to choose a date when a physical meeting would be convenient for him.”
Nwaugo stated that the five chairmen “ought to propose several dates and time, as it is customary in any proposed formal meeting between NBA officials and any other body, for the Attorney-General to choose the date most convenient for him.”
The observation suggests the chairmen’s engagement with the AG was more procedural than substantive, a box-ticking exercise rather than a genuine attempt to facilitate dialogue.
When the physical meeting did not materialise, the chairmen wrote to the Governor on April 1 “requesting to pay a courtesy visit to the Governor without stating reasons for the proposed meeting,” a further procedural misstep that Nwaugo flagged.
Nwaugo’s most surprising criticism concerned what the communiqué omitted rather than what it contained.
“I noted with sadness that whereas the five chairmen of NBA branches were eagerly seeking to ensure that JUSUN members get the best pay package for their members, the five NBA chairmen did not devote a line in their communiqué to demand that JUSUN members should stop their ceaseless taking of huge sums of money which they squeeze and extract from lawyers’ pockets whenever a lawyer presents processes to be filed in court,” Nwaugo stated.
He described a system of informal payments that lawyers are forced to make to judiciary staff: “Some registrars and bailiffs have even fixed amounts of money as their ‘bench fee’ to be extorted from a lawyer to have the lawyer’s document processed or served, without fear of the Corrupt Practices Act and Section 99 of the Criminal Code Laws of Abia State.”
The observation reveals a tension that the communiqué ignored: while demanding better funding and autonomy for the judiciary on behalf of JUSUN members, the NBA chairmen failed to address the direct financial burden that JUSUN members impose on lawyers through unofficial fees that Nwaugo describes as extortion.
“If you are championing better conditions for judiciary staff, you should equally champion the end of the illegal charges they impose on the lawyers whose clients fund the judicial system,” Nwaugo’s position implies.
Nwaugo noted that the Attorney-General had presented a defence that the chairmen’s communiqué did not adequately acknowledge.
The AG had stated that the government and JUSUN had been “meeting ceaselessly to resolve the issues leading to the strike,” that the executive arm had “conceded so much to the demands of JUSUN, leaving about one or two issues to be resolved,” and that the head of the judiciary and the executive arm “have good understanding on the issue in question.”
The AG also stated that “the state Government appreciates the leadership and members of JUSUN for their patience and constructive engagement and reaffirms its commitment to a fair and sustainable resolution.”
Nwaugo argued that in light of these representations, the chairmen’s approach of issuing ultimatums and threatening mass protests was inappropriate.
Nwaugo concluded with his view of what the chairmen should have done instead.
“The duty of Chairmen of the five NBA branches at this stage ought to be to play a reconciliatory role between the two parties by creating a forum where both parties will feel free to make concessions and end the imbroglio, rather than threaten one party in favour of the other,” Nwaugo stated.
The observation positions Nwaugo as advocating for the NBA to serve as a neutral mediator between the government and JUSUN rather than as an advocate for one side. Both parties, he implies, have legitimate interests: JUSUN wants financial autonomy and better conditions, while the government claims to be making concessions and working toward a resolution. The NBA, as the professional body whose members are most directly affected by the closure of courts, has a unique interest in ending the strike and a unique credibility to facilitate compromise.
By threatening the government with mass protests while making no demands of JUSUN, the chairmen have abandoned the neutral ground that would make them effective mediators and have instead become partisans in a dispute where their members suffer regardless of which side prevails.
Nwaugo’s critique touches on a recurring theme in NBA governance: the tendency of branch leaders to take decisions without adequate consultation with their members, and the gap between the democratic principles the Association espouses and the practices of its officers.
The JUSUN strike has shut down courts in Abia State for over a month, preventing lawyers from filing processes, hearing cases, or accessing justice for their clients. The economic impact on lawyers, particularly junior lawyers who depend on daily court appearances for their income, has been severe.
In this context, the question of how the NBA responds, whether through confrontation or mediation, ultimatums or dialogue, chairmen’s resolutions or members’ mandates, is not merely procedural but goes to the heart of whether the Association can effectively advocate for its members’ interests while maintaining the institutional credibility needed to influence government policy.
As Nwaugo stated: the duty is reconciliation, not confrontation. Whether the five chairmen will heed the counsel of a former national officer who has served the Association for nearly two decades, or whether they will proceed with their threatened mass protest, remains to be seen.
Victor C. Nwaugo Esq. is a former National Legal Adviser of the NBA (2010-2012), former NEC member (2006-2014), and a member of the Advisory Committee of NBA Aba Branch.
The book, titled The Law of Torts in Nigeria: A Functional Approach, authored by Professor Hagler Sunny Okorie Ph.D and Ikeocha, Nathaniel Ngozi Esq, offers law students, practitioners, and academics a comprehensive guide to understanding and applying tort law in Nigerian courts. Interested buyers can place orders via the following contact numbers: 08028636615, 08037667945, 08032253813, or +234 902 196 2209.
______________________________________________________________________
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR LAWYERS: A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE
Reimagine your practice with the power of AI “...this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic.” — Ohio Books Ltd
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe, Esq., ACIArb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director, Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
Bonus:
Get a FREE eBook titled “How to Use the AI in Legalpedia and Law Pavilion” with every purchase.
How to Order: 📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878 📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com 🌐 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access directly online at: https://selar.com/prv626
________________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
