Academics Have Continuously Assisted Supreme Court In Deciding Knotty Cases, And Are Deserving Of SAN Rank — Prof. Olusesan Oliyide

*Says Ernest Ojukwu, Idornigie, Omorogie, Fagbohun Espouse Truth On The Subject
*Says Academics Are Advocates In The Literal Meaning Of the Word

A law professor, Olusesan Oliyide has opposed calls by some Senior Advocates of Nigeria to exclude academics from the award of the SAN title. According to Prof. Oliyide of the Faculty of Law, Olabisi Onabanjo University, the argument championed by J.S.Okutepa SAN and Adegboruwa SAN smacks of resounding fallacy and appears to be pedestrian.

In a statement made available to TheNigeriaLawyer, the law scholar aligned with the arguments shared by the likes of Olanrewaju Fagbohun SAN, Ernest Ojukwu SAN, Edoba Omoregie SAN and Paul Idornigie SAN.

He said, :I have followed, with keen interest, the ongoing debate about the aptness of conferring the highly esteemed status of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) on distinguished academics. The arguments of Learned Silks Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, Jibrin Samuel Okutepa, AbiodunOwonikoko, et al, admittedly, have been as forceful as those of Learned Silks Olanrewaju Fagbohun, Ernest Ojukwu, Edoba Omoregie, Paul Idornigie, et al. Unfortunately, as forceful as they are, the arguments of the former (Adegboruwa, et al) smacks of resounding fallacy and appears a little bit pedestrian. Conversely, those of the latter (Fagbohun, et al) are not only forceful, they are as convincing as they project the truth and nothing but the truth regarding the subject.”

He also argued that contrary to the positions taken by the two sides of the divide, an academic also qualifies as an Advocate within the meaning of the word. He noted, “Having said that, there appears to be a missing link in the arguments of both schools, which is: simple understanding of who an advocate is. An advocate has been generally, and undisputably, described as “a person who publicly supports or recommends a particular cause or policy”. Within the context of this suitable definition, it will, certainly, be wrong, as Learned Silks Adegboruwa, et al, will want the public to believe, that the SAN status should be the exclusive preserve of Lawyers who have distinguished themselves in litigation. Undoubtedly, academics who have, through their top-notch teaching, research and publications, made substantial contributions towards expanding the frontiers of jurisprudence, eminently deserve to be conferred with the SAN rank.”

According to him, the thinking of our forebears in that regard is not only robust and salutary, it is also a legacy, a bequest that we all must be proud of and assiduously seek to uphold and even improve upon. “In this connection, I also disagree with the suggestion, in certain quarters, that the SAN rank is a “follow-follow” exercise, blindly, modelled after the position in England. Contrarily, it is a reward system that our forebears wisely fashioned as a way of encouraging distinction in law practice in Nigeria. If the reward mechanism is similar to that in England, so be it. I also differ from the suggestion that has been proffered by some that the current English position where academics are recognised as Honourary QCs should be adopted in Nigeria. I am of the firm view that this English position suggests, wrongly, that academics are not advocates. Academics are, certainly, advocates and the only difference between them and litigation lawyers is that the realm of their advocacy, unlike that of litigation lawyers, transcends the frontiers of the courtroom. Therefore, the Nigerian position is much better and should be sustained with the modification that much more slots should be reserved for academics.”

He added, “By way of emphasis, the arguments of Adegboruwa, SAN, et al, suggest that, whereas a ltitgation lawyer who cites Sagay on Contract in court, in support of his case, is entitled to the rank of SAN, renown Professor Itsejuwa Esanjumi Sagay, the accomplished author of the book, is not. That seems a thoroughly uneventful arugument. Same example, as Professor Sagay’s, will pass regarding Professors Benjamin Obi Nwabueze, Gabriel Adesiyan Olawoyin, Jelili Adebisi Omotola, Imran Oluwole Smith, Taiwo Adetayo Ibitola Osipitan, Oluyemisi Adefunke Bamgbose, Olanrewaju Adigun Fagbohun, Ernest Maduabuchi Ojukwu, Joash O. Amupitan, Yemi Akinseye-George, Mohammed Taofeeq Abdulrazaq, Bankole Adekunle Akintoye Sodipo, Abiola Sanni, Olaniyi Ismail Olatubosun, Dakas C.J. Dakas, Oludayo Gabriel Amokaye. The list is, definitely, inexhaustible.”

He further pointed that courts globally have continued to rely on the expertise and depth of accomplished academics to assist in reaching decisions especially in classicus cases. He posited, “The argument here is accentuated by the global culture of the courts inviting accomplished academics as amici curiae in knotty-cases before them. In Nigeria, we cannot remember how many times the Supreme Court invited Professor Jelili Omotola, SAN, as amicus curiae, to guide them on the interpretation of the Land Use Act. This was, definitely, in recognition of his outstanding scholarship and knowledge enhancing understanding of land law.”

He equally responded to the suggestion by Adegboruwa and Okutepa, that Professorship should be the zenith to be attained by an legal academic in Nigeria.  Prof. Oliyide noted, “Furthermore, the argument that the apogee of the career progression of a law academic should be the rank of Professor, with respect to the Silks Adegboruwa, et al, is inapt and disappointing. This is because there is a clear difference between a Law Professor and a Law Professor who doubles as SAN.

The former is one who has attained distinction in teaching, research and community service and has generally met the requirements specified for promoting academics in the University where he works. The latter, on the other hand, has attained distinction in teaching, research and community service, generally met the criteria specified by the University where he works and has, additionally been certified as contributing meaningfully towards the progression of the legal profession, by virtue of the depth, profundity, pervasiveness and creativity exhibited in his teaching and research output. He has shaped legislative reforms, judicial thinking and opinions of litigation lawyers and academics like him, through his exemplary scholarship. In this regard, I recall, with nostalgia, how Professor Omotola, while stressing an argument against a decision of the Supreme Court, in the course of teaching us in class, would retort: “I feel like going to wake (His Lordship, Hon. Justice) Idigbe from his grave. He would have given the correct interpretation of that statute”. Are we suggesting that such a personage who felt so strongly about the cause of law advancement, was undeserving of the SAN rank?”

He added that the suggestion, in some other quarters that conferring the SAN rank on academics is a demonstration of the “title-craze tradition” is incorrect. According to him, conferring the SAN rank on academics is a highly commendable reward system meant to encourage excellence and distinction among law academics. “It is a worthy legacy of our progenitors and it behoves on us all, not only to uphold the sanctity of the legacy, but also to ensure that many more conferrment slots are reserved for deserving academics than presently are. Let me conclude by saluting all the academics that have been conferred with the rank and say that we are extremely proud of their accomplishments. Permit me to also say, unequivocally, that I look forward and pray fervently, to join their prestigious comity in no distant future.”