By Sylvester Udemezue
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
BACKGROUND
A 22 September 2025 news report by TheNigeriaLawyer, under the title “Stop Encouraging Rebellion Against Egbe Amofin” — Yoruba Lawyers Forum Warns Alegeh SAN Over NBA 2026 Presidency,” stated that “The Yoruba Lawyers Forum, Egbe Amofin O’dua, has issued a strong warning against attempts to undermine its consensus decision on the 2026 Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) presidential election, accusing former NBA President and Trustee, Mr Augustine Akegeh, SAN, of encouraging rebellion within the fold.” TheNigeriaLawyer further reported that “In a Statement signed by its chairman, Aare Isiaka Abiola Olagungu, SAN, and Secretary, Adetunji Osho, the Forum said it received with concern the letter from the Midwest Bar Forum conceding the NBA presidency to the Southwest, but was alarmed by subsequent developments after the 2025 NBA Annual General Conference in Enugu.” A fair summary of Egbe Amofin’s statement, which came in the form of a letter dated 17 September 2025, is respectfully given below:
“Egbe Amofin’s letter, as reported in TheNigeriaLawyer, not only restates its defense of the zoning-and-consensus process for the 2026 NBA presidency but also forcefully protests efforts to destabilize that arrangement by launching sharp criticism of Augustine Alegeh, SAN, accusing him of open partisanship, divisiveness, fomenting internal dissent through open campaigning against the agreed candidate, and undermining the agreement reached by regional forums; it alleges that Alegeh has actively encouraged rebellion against the consensus, sought to bypass or subvert the rotational fairness agreed by the Bar, and has shown disregard for inclusivity by promoting personal ambition over the collective will of the South-West consensus, conduct which, according to the letter, risks fracturing the unity of the Nigerian Bar Association, betrays democratic norms, and compromises the integrity of the electoral process, and which must therefore be resisted if the Bar’s principles of fairness, respect, and regional harmony are to be upheld; the Forum emphasizes that the Mid-West Bar Forum had in 2025 formally conceded the 2026 presidency to the South-West under the NBA’s micro-zoning system, a decision validated at the Pre-NEC in Enugu in line with long-standing rotational and inclusive practice, and it defends the selection of Aare Olumuyiwa Akinboro, SAN, as the South-West consensus candidate, highlighting that his adoption followed a transparent, participatory process in which all aspirants, including Mrs. Oyinkansola Badejo-Okunsanya (SAN designate), were duly considered; it warns that it will resist any attempt (covert or overt) to ridicule, undermine, manipulate, or compromise the consensus agreement, stressing that regional consensus, rotational fairness, and inclusivity must not be sacrificed to individual ambition, that the Bar’s unity and the democratic integrity of the NBA are non-negotiable, and that it will call out and confront any effort to turn the election into a personal fiefdom, while also expressing gratitude to voices like Mr. Bayo Akinlade who has spoken against such divisive tendencies and reaffirming its full support for Akinboro as the region’s legitimate candidate.”
INTRODUCTION TO OUR REJOINDER
With utmost respect for the illustrious contributions of Egbe Amofin O’odua to the growth of the Bar, we at The Reality Ministry of Truth, Law, and Justice (TRM) have carefully studied the open letter dated 17 September 2024, signed on behalf of Egbe Amofin by the Chairman and Secretary of its Governing Council, concerning the 2026 NBA presidential elections. While acknowledging Egbe Amofin’s passion, we find its positions legally, morally and constitutionally unsustainable, procedurally flawed, and potentially injurious to the unity and integrity of the Bar.. The aim of this rejoinder is simple but solemn: to subject Egbe Amofin’s assertions to constitutional scrutiny with a view to exposing their infirmities and reaffirming the supremacy of the NBA Constitution over resolutions or positions of any regional or tribal organisation within the Nigerian Bar. Our objective is to demonstrate that the Nigerian Bar Association is a national body governed by constitutional democracy, not a feudal enclave. Regional endorsements may guide but cannot govern. While zoning structures eligibility, it does not enthrone, encourage, or permit imposition.
(A) CONSTITUTIONAL FOUNDATIONS AS THE BEDROCK OF NBA ELECTIONS
The NBA Constitution 2015 is unequivocal in spelling out how national elections are to be conducted. The following provisions, which Egbe Amofin cannot sidestep, are decisive:
(1). Section 10(1): “There shall be established an independent body to be known as the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (hereinafter called ‘the ECNBA’) to conduct elections into National Offices of the Association and election of the representatives of the Association in the General Council of the Bar.”
(2). Section 10(5): “For the purposes of election into National Offices … the country shall be divided into three zones as set out in the Second Schedule to this Constitution.”
(3). Part 2.1 (a) and (d) of the Second Schedule to the Constitution to the NBA provides that “(a) The Association shall for the purpose of elections of National Officers be divided into three geographical zones namely – Northern zone, Eastern zone and Western zone. (d) Where a position is zoned to any particular geographical zone, the position shall be rotated and held in turn by the different groups and/or sections in the geographical zone.” Part 2.1 (e) of the Second Schedule of the Constitution then provides a list of the states that make up each of the zones….”
(4). Section 10(6): “Election into National Offices and election of the representatives of the Association in the General Council of the Bar shall be by universal suffrage and electronic voting as set out in the Second Schedule to this Constitution.”
(5). Article XXIII(c)(ii) of the NBA Uniform Bye-Laws For Sections dealing with “miscellaneous”: “No member shall resort to litigation without first complying with the laid down Internal Dispute Resolution Procedure set out in the Association’s Constitution. It shall be an act of misconduct to breach this provision.”
(6). Section 17(4) of the NBA Constitution: “No Section, Section Committee or any of their officers or other representatives, shall represent the Association or hold themselves out as representing the Association in any respect, or take any action in the name of the Association except as authorized by the National Executive Council or the Bye-Law.”
(7). Section 20(1)(f): “A National Officer may be removed from office where he/she is involved in an act or behaviour that brings or is likely to bring the Association into disrepute… provided, however, that such officer may only be removed from office but two-thirds (2/3) majority of National Executive Council members present at a meeting of the National Executive Council and after such National Officer shall have been given an opportunity to defend himself/herself.”
(8). Section 21 (1–4):(1)“In the event of any dispute or conflict or grievance between or amongst members, or any dispute between a member and the Association, in relation to the operation and coordination of the affairs of the Association, such dispute or conflict or grievance shall first be submitted to the Dispute Resolution Committee for resolution.” (2). Any aggrieved member shall lodge a complaint with the Dispute Resolution Committee not later than 14 days of the occurrence of such dispute.” (3). The Dispute Resolution Committee shall entertain and determine any such complaint logded by any member and deliver its decision thereon within 60 days of receipt of such complaint.” (4). The decision of the Dispute Resolution Committee shall be final and binding on the parties.”
From these provisions, two inescapable truths emerge:
(i). The ECNBA is the sole constitutional umpire of NBA elections; no regional forum such as Egbe Amofin can usurp its mandate.
(ii). Universal suffrage is sacrosanct; endorsements cannot replace the sovereign right of every eligible member of the Bar to campaign, support, or vote for a candidate of their choice.
(B) POINT-BY-POINT ANALYTICAL REJOINDER TO EGBE AMOFIN’S CLAIMS
(1). On the Mid-West Bar Forum’s “Concession” and Egbe’s Claim of Imposition: Egbe Amofin asserts that since the Mid-West Forum “conceded” the 2026 presidency to the South-West, its endorsement stands binding. With due respect, zoning (Section 10(5)) ensures rotational eligibility but does not empower or encourage regional imposition. The electorate of the Bar remains the final sovereign. To elevate endorsement to imposition, as Egbe Amofin is attempting, is to subvert constitutional democracy within the NBA. We explained this in an earlier commentary titled “On the Constitutional Limits of Egbe Amofin Resolutions in NBA Presidential Elections: Questions for My Beloved Friend, Olayinka Sokoya, Esq.” (18 August 2025):
“My dear Mr. Sokoya, the right to elect the NBA President in 2026 belongs to all eligible lawyers from the 36 states of Nigeria and the FCT, not exclusively to members of Egbe Amofin. Could it not then be said that Egbe Amofin lacks the locus to dictate to all Nigerian lawyers who should be their NBA President in 2026? … The correct interpretation of the NBA Constitution is that members of the NBA should elect a President from the South-West, not that Egbe Amofin should select and present one for the entire association. Would you not agree, Sir?”
(2). On the Alleged Impropriety of Mr. Augustine Alegeh, SAN’s Endorsement: Egbe Amofin condemns a past NBA President for supporting a candidate, but fails to admit that no NBA constitutional clause prohibits such endorsement or open campaign. Mere open support for a candidate, absent coercion or corruption, is not misconduct or any wrong. Hence, to gag elder statesmen is to impoverish discourse and chill legitimate political expression.
(3). On “Regional Consensus” Versus Individual Choice: Egbe Amofin argues that its endorsement overrides personal choices. Section 17(4) expressly prohibits any Section or Forum from representing the NBA without NEC authorization. Thus, consensus or endorsement, however noble, remains advisory, not binding. Elevating “regional consensus” above individual rights is unconstitutional, undemocratic, and divisive. Every lawyer from the South-West who is eligible retains the right to aspire, regardless of Egbe’s position or resolution.
(4). On Allegations of Improper Influence: Egbe Amofin alleges covert manipulation by unseen forces. Section 21 already provides the remedy: file a complaint with the Dispute Resolution Committee. Public insinuations without proof violate due process. Suspicion is not evidence and cannot suffice in law. We support transparency and encourage Egbe to pursue grievances through due process of law rather than rumours or gossip.
(5). On Transparency and Double Standards: Egbe Amofin itself openly endorsed a candidate and yet is now criticising Mr. Augustine Alegeh, SAN, for doing the exact same thing. This inconsistency on Egbe Amofin’s part, resembles the proverbial “pot calling the kettle black” and explains why in the book of Matthew 7:5, the Bible warns thus: “First get rid of the log in your own eye; then you will see well enough to deal with the speck in your friend’s eye.” Integrity demands transparency. Egbe should publish how its endorsement was reached: date, attendees, criteria, dissenting voices, and decision-making process. Absent such disclosure, its moral authority collapses under double standards.
(6). On the Alleged Open Partisanship: It is widely believed that the endorsement by Egbe Amofin was the result of a script written by a certain ex President of the NBA. Now, if indeed Egbe’s endorsed aspirant is the candidate being projected by a past NBA President, then why would Egbe Amofin condemn another past President for doing the same? Should what is permissible for one be impermissible for another? Is sauce for the goose not sauce for the gander? Nigerian lawyers are not blind; they can discern when a certain endorsement lacks transparency or reflects a predetermined script. With due respect, the endorsement by Egbe Amofin reminds us of a similar situation in the Bible book of Genesis 27:22: “The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau.”
(7). On the NBA’s National Character: The NBA Presidential election is a national affair, not a regional chieftaincy contest. Any lawyer is free to support candidates across zones. Egbe Amofin’s suggestion that only South-West lawyers may support South-West aspirants is grossly untenable. History has proven otherwise: in 2016, South-West leaders endorsed Chief J. K. Gadzama, SAN, from the North-East (see: “NBA Presidency: South-West Lawyers Support Gadzama”; Daily Trust, 17 May 2016). Again in 2024, Egbe itself endorsed Mr. Chuka Ikwuazom, SAN, from the South-East (see: “Egbe Amofin O’odua, Leaders and South-West Stakeholders Endorse Chukwuka Ikwuazom SAN for President of the NBA”; Loyal Nigerian Lawyer, 15 July 2024). At that time, Egbe Amofin did not regard its endorsement of one of the candidates from other NBA Zones as constituting any “interference” in the affairs of the affected Zones. Yet, in 2025, the same group is quick to accuse other lawyers (who are merely exercising their constitutional right to support a candidate of their choice in a national election) of undermining due process. The natural question that arises, therefore, is whether Egbe Amofin now believes that only it and lawyers from the South-West are entitled to openly support candidates from other zones, while lawyers from other zones are somehow barred from openly promoting or campaigning for candidates from the South-West. With utmost respect, such a position by Egbe Amofin is inconsistent, discriminatory and undemocratic.
(8). On Aspirants Reportedly Promoted by Past Presidents: Contrary to Egbe Amofin’s letter which suggests that only one aspirant enjoys such backing, the truth is that no fewer than three of the four South-West aspirants, including Egbe’s own candidate, are rumoured to be sponsored by past NBA Presidents. If this is the case, why should only one particular aspirant, or the alleged sponsor of that aspirant, be singled out for criticism or condemnation? Such selectivity raises questions of fairness and balance and creates the appearance of double standards. As we have said, the NBA is a democratic, national association that belongs equally to all its members across Nigeria. Every lawyer, whether from within a particular zone or outside it, retains the constitutional right to promote, support, or campaign for any aspirant of their choice. To vilify one aspirant (or his supporters) while overlooking others engaged in precisely the same conduct is neither just nor equitable. For an association that prides itself on fairness, integrity, and transparency, it is important that the same standard be applied across the board. Anything less not only undermines credibility but also weakens the unity of the Bar.
(C) THE WAY FORWARD: CONSTRUCTIVE CONSTITUTIONAL PROPOSALS
(1). Transparency: Both ECNBA and regional bodies must ensure openness in all their processes and programmes. Egbe Amofin’s endorsement process should have demonstrated fairness and independence, free from hidden scripts written by vested interests. But even if that was the case (although many think it isn’t), endorsement is merely a show of open support for a particular candidate, not an indication of acceptance by the electorate; the electorate in the NBA Presidential election 2026 consist of all eligible lawyers in Nigeria, not only the leaders or members of Egbe Amofin.
(2). Due Process: Grievances must follow Section 21 procedures, not be prosecuted via gossip or media propaganda.
(3). Respect for Constitutional Supremacy: Endorsements must remain and be seen by all to remain persuasive, but never coercive or binding.
(4). Preserving Unity: The Bar must reject overreach, ignore regional or tribal impositions or adoptions andembrace fair competition based on competence, vision, and integrity and respect for the provisions of the NBA Constitution on power rotation among the three Zones and within the micro-zones in each Zone.
(D) FINAL WORDS: NBA CONSTITUTION RANKS ABOVE CONCESSION; PROCESS LIES ABOVE IMPOSITION
Egbe Amofin’s 17 September 2024 letter, though spirited, conflicts with the clear and binding provisions of the NBA Constitution. The Constitution, not sectional bargaining or endorsements, is our supreme guide in all the processes of the NBA Presidential election 2026. Zoning structures eligibility and limits participation, but does not encourage or permit imposition or overreach. In respect of NBA national elections, endorsements (where transparent) may influence, but only universal suffrage decides. All disputes or grievances must be resolved or pursued through constitutional mechanisms, not public innuendos, insinuations, accusations or personal attacks. We accordingly respectfully urge Egbe Amofin O’dua to humbly revisit its position in the 17 September 2025 letter; to respect the supremacy of the NBA Constitution; to respect the right of Nigerian lawyers to elect by universal suffrage, any candidate of their choice (from the Southwest) as the NBA President in 2026; and to recommit to unity through due process of law, not power, imposition or usurpation of the powers of either the ECNBA or the generality of Nigerian lawyers who alone constitute the electorate for the NBA Presidential election 2026. The dignity of the Bar, the sanctity of its Constitution, and the trust of its members demand nothing less.
Long live the NBA!
Respectfully,
Sylvester Udemezue (Udems)
Proctor, The Reality Ministry of Truth, Law, and Justice (TRM).
Tel: 08021365545
Email: udems@therealityministry.ngo; mails@therealityministry.ngo
Web: www.therealityministry.ngo
(25 September 2025).
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “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
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
______________________________________________________________________
