NBA rejects alleged AGF directives, insists on 2026 national officers’ election

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has rejected an alleged directive attributed to the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, seeking to alter its 2026 national officers’ election process.

The NBA described the move in a statement signed by its President, Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN and made available to newsmen on Tuesday, as unconstitutional, ultra vires, and an attempt to undermine the association’s independence.

The umbrella body of lawyers in Nigeria said that only its National Executive Council (NEC) has the constitutional authority to direct the postponement of its national officers’ election.

According to the statement, the NBA said its attention had been drawn to a document purportedly containing the report of a sub-committee and comments by the AGF directing the disbandment of the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA), postponement of the election, termination of the current election service provider, appointment of a caretaker committee, incorporation of National Identification Number (NIN) verification into the voting process, and a review of the NBA Constitution to abolish universal suffrage.

Describing the alleged directives as unlawful, the association maintained that it is an independent professional body that is not subject to the control of the AGF or any arm of government.

According to the NBA, the provisions of Section 10(2) of the Legal Practitioners Act clearly define the limited circumstances under which an external body may intervene in its affairs, noting that none of those conditions currently exists.

The association also questioned the authenticity of the purported report, stating that it was neither issued on the official letterhead of the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation nor formally communicated to the NBA.

The NBA further argued that the AGF could not validly grant reliefs that are already being sought in pending litigation arising from disputes over the association’s electoral process, including the Egbe Amofin cases before the High Court of Oyo State and Appeal No. CA/IB/110/2026 between Aham Ejelam, SAN & 4 Ors v. Ibrahim Lawal & 7 Ors.

The association disclosed that the June 11, 2026 meeting convened by the AGF was intended solely to facilitate an amicable settlement of the ongoing litigation, noting that, participants only mandated a sub-committee to liaise with the parties to encourage withdrawal of the lawsuits and not to investigate or make findings against the NBA President or recommend sweeping reforms to the electoral process.

The NBA also criticised the sub-committee’s alleged findings against its President, arguing that they breached the constitutional right to a fair hearing because he was never served with the memoranda relied upon before adverse conclusions were reached.

It also questioned the neutrality of the sub-committee, contending that Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, was unsuitable to lead the panel because of his involvement in the underlying dispute.

On proposals to introduce NIN verification for voters, the NBA said it had already conducted a risk assessment and concluded that modifying the existing election platform at this stage could jeopardise the entire electoral process due to the possibility that the National Identity Management Commission’s platform may be unable to handle the expected surge in authentication requests.

The association also defended its election technology provider, dismissing arguments that the contractor should be replaced because it is a sole proprietorship.

“It is discriminatory to contend that merely because a service provider is a sole proprietor, he cannot provide services, when most legal practitioners, including members of the committee, operate sole proprietorship law offices,” the statement said.

Reaffirming its position, the NBA declared that the electoral timetable released by the ECNBA remains unchanged and that the election will proceed as scheduled.

The association stressed that it would continue to operate strictly in accordance with its Constitution and decision-making organs, insisting that the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation has no authority to interfere with its democratic process.

The statement reiterated the commitment of the NBA to due process and the rule of law while maintaining that any proposed settlement reached during mediation can only become binding if accepted by all parties involved in the dispute.