Apex Igbo Socio-cultural organization, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, on Wednesday told the Chief of Army Staff, Tukur Buratai that he lacks the powers to declare state of emergency in the southeast.

The organization was reacting to a statement allegedly made by Mr Buratai wherein he was quoted to threatened to impose a star of emergency in the southeast.

Two officials of the Department of State Security (DSS), were killed last month in Enugu when members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) were killed in a clash with security agents in Enugu.

Also some members of the proscribed group were also killed in the said clash with many injured and others arrested.

In the wake of the incident and with tensions high in the region especially in Enugu, there were unconfirmed reports of security agents, especially Military officers, being attacked in Enugu.

Reports also emerged that the Chief of staff, visibly angry at the attacks, threatened state of emergency in the region if the attacks continued.

TheThenigeriaLawyer could not confirm the authenticity of the said threat allegedly made by Mr Buratai.

Nevertheless, Ohanaeze in the statement signed by its Publicity Secretary, Uche Achi-Okpagha noted that the Chief of Staff has not come out to deny making the statement till date.

“The attention of Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide has been drawn to a statement credited to the Chief of Army Staff, General Tukur Buratai, threatening to impose a state of emergency in the South East if Governors of the states allowed any further attack on security forces in the states, a statement he has not denied,” the statement said.

The group noted that while it decries violence in any form in the states, it takes particular exception to an open threat and warning to South East governors who by the country’s constitution are chief security officers of their states but are lame ducks in practice as all security commands come from Abuja.

“Ohanaeze Ndigbo finds it particularly provocative for General Buratai to issue such a warning to governors of the South East where relative peace prevails while he has not done the same in the North Central, North West and North East which have become theatres of war and where army posts and bases have been subjected to incessant attacks by the Boko Haram, ISWA/ISIS, bandits and Fulani herdsmen, killing and maiming Nigerian soldiers,” he said.

The group also wondered where the army chief derives the power to issue such a threat which under the country’s constitution can only be carried out by the National Assembly on demand by the President.

“It is highly surprising that an army chief who was watching as the governor of Katsina State was negotiating and taking pictures with armed bandits would turn round to threaten to impose a state of emergency in states where unarmed citizens are agitating against the harsh and inhuman conditions they have been subjected to by their country.”

Mr Okpagha said that Ohaneze believes that the threat by General Buratai is a vindication of the belief that the South East is being regarded as a conquered territory, exemplified in the army of occupation stationed in the area.

“It is also a glaring example of the reckless impunity of public officers and a tacit manifestation of the vacuum in governance at the Federal level,” Mr Okpagha added.

… Says Govt has no plan for palliative as hikes erase minimum wage
… Subsidy must go, FG insists

Organised Labour under the auspices of the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) has again disagreed with the Federal Government over the recent increase in the prices of petroleum products and electricity tariff, stressing that both policies are a burden on Nigerian workers.

President of the NLC, Ayubba Wabba, made this known to the Government during dialogue with government representatives on the state of the economy, even as he condemned the fixing of prices of electricity and petrol without consultations with Nigerians.

He also lamented that the increases have erased the gains of the minimum wage of N30,000 signed into law by President Muhammadu Buhari judging by the current state of things especially with high rate of inflation.

Wabba said many Nigerian workers are struggling to survive because of the high cost of living caused by government’s recent policies which included increase in the Value Added Tax (VAT).

Minister of Labour and Employment, Chris Ngige led the government team to the dialogue which held at the Banquet Hall of the Presidential Villa, Abuja. It also had his junior minister, Festus Keyamo SAN; Minister of Power, Mamman; Minister of Works and Housing, Babatunde Fashola SAN; Minister of State for Petroleum, Timipre Sylva and others in attendance.

The labour delegation was led by Wabba, President of the TUC, Quadri Olaleye, Secretary General of the TUC, Musa Ozigi-Lawal, Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria President, Festus Osifo and the President of Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Association of Nigeria, Williams Akporeha among others.

Wabba stated: “The question now is what do you have on the table to actually cushion the effect on workers and their families because they have been pushed to the wall. They are already enraged. Do you have anything for us so that we can say yes despite this challenges this is what I have for Nigerian workers that they can be able to have something that can cushion this effect for them?

“Already, the value of the minimum wage have been eroded. The purchasing power parity when you compare with all West African countries we are already on the ground. That is the reality. If Ghana compares their minimum wage with our own you will see their minimum wage.”

The NLC President blamed federal government for ” transferring the “inefficiency in the subsidy regime” to the consumers which they have to pay through hike in price even as he urged the government to fix the nation’s refinery and stop the corruption inherent in the subsidy regime.

Wabba said: “I agree with Mr. President that subsidy is a fraud but do we address it or transfer it to the customers? That is where the issue is. We don’t need to transfer it to the customers.

“More than 90 countries of the world actually have minimum wage on this. Those are the issues that is biting very hard and workers and citizens are crying aloud that there is much burden on them.

“We have increased VAT, we have increased some taxes, we have increased now the fuel price and the tariff on electricity. An ordinary worker can’t pay those charges. In fact higher level officers are complaining seriously. This is the predicament we are in.

“Therefore let us also look for solutions. How do we mitigate this impact which is very pronounced on workers.

“Any time you increase the cost of petroleum product and electricity tariff they will transfer the cost to the consumer and therefore the cost of goods and services will go up. Clearly speaking, what we need to do is to protect these vulnerable group of people- the workers and the citizens.”

Contributing the TUC President Olaleye, who on Monday threatened strike with a seven-day ultimatum to the Government, insisted that the government has to reverse the recent increases and policies which have been biting Nigerians hard.

The TUC president stated: “Nigerian workers are crying and the populace are also crying. Last year December we were so happy that when we signed the minimum wage agreement and Nigerian workers were happy that their lots were increased. Unfortunately now they are crying. By calculation we are losing additional 15 percent of what we gained as a result of signing minimum wage.

“For somebody who is paid N6,666 as increment now is losing not less than N25, 000 from his income. The N6, 666 is going additional N15, 000 is added.

“Let us remove the effect of Covid -19, our leaders, our representatives nothing has cc changed. We have not been able to discuss labour matters since February all in the name of there is Covid -19 but people that are signing budget, people that are sharing money on daily basis they meet either on zoom or physically. They meet and share those money but when they come to labour matters we have to remember that there is Covid -19.

“The questions are members are asking is that does it really means that the politicians represent the rich people in this country? Does it mean it is only labour that represent the poor people? Does it mean when we have economic predicament that is when we call Nigerians that we want to hear from them but when we have surpluses we hear nothing about it.

“I cannot remember any time in this country that we had surplus and Nigerian workers or populace will feel it on their Palm or in their pockets but when we have predicaments especially crude oil crash then labour will be called upon, let us see how we can rescue the economy. I think it is high time everybody bear their fathers’ name.”

However, Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva during the dialogue pointed out that the federal government was yet to begin the full deregulation of the downstream sector because of the Government does not want to suffer the people.

The minister in presentation made on the economy stated that the reigning cost of petrol is N163 but it is sold for N161 per litre, which indicates that full deregulation is indeed yet to take off in the country.

He noted that going by the current exchange rate, the products could have been sold at N183 per litre.

He said the federal government spent N10.4 trillion on petrol subsidy between 2016 and 2019 adding that country was losing N1 billion daily to fuel subsidy between 2016 and 2019.

He said “We have not fully deregulated because of the concerns government has for Nigerians. Price of fuel could go up to 183 going by the current rate of the dollar. We need to open up the economy even though the initial stage may bring pains to Nigerians.

“Subsidy was not sustainable. Some of the past governments didn’t have political will to remove it.
We know that rise in prices will bring some pains to Nigerians. We are the first to admit that. We have thought of alternatives.”

THE Governor of Imo State, Sen. Hope Uzodinma has assented into Law, the Imo State Administration of Criminal Justice Law, No. 2 of 2020 on the 11th day of March, 2020.

However, controversies have trailed the legality or otherwise of the provisions relating to “PLEASURE”, permitting the State Governor to detain suspects at his pleasure.

Section 484 of the Law provides :

“Where any person is ordered to be detained during the Governor’s pleasure he shall notwithstanding anything in this Law or in any other written law contained be liable to be detained in such place and under such conditions as the Governor may direct and whilst so detained shall be deemed to be in legal custody”.

In addition, the Law provides that a detainee may only be discharged if granted license by the Governor.

Section 485 provides:

(1) A person detained during the Governor’s pleasure may at any time be discharged by the Governor on license

(2) A license under subsection (1) of this section may be in such form and may contain such conditions as the Governor may direct.

(3) A license under this section may at anytime be revoked or varied by the Governor and where license has been revoked the person to whom the license relates shall proceed to such place as the Governor may direct and if he fails to do so, may be arrested without warrant and taken to such place.

Meanwhile, by the above provision, it means the Governor can detain a suspect at will and direct the custody in which such a person is to be kept.

The Special Adviser on Media and Publicity to the President, Femi Adesina, said this administration inherited a “terribly” divided country from former President, Goodluck Jonathan, in 2015.

Adesina, speaking on Channels Television’s “Politics Today” on Wednesday, insisted Nigeria had always been divided.

He spoke in response to well publicises comments made by Nobel Laureate, Prof. Wole Soyinka while backing another former President, Olusegun Obasanjo on the issue.

According to Adesina, “Nigeria had always been divided. Always. Right from amalgamation in 1914, Nigeria has always been divided.

“Nigeria is an inconvenient amalgamation but we have worked at it and I tell you that there is no time in the history of this country that the country was not divided but then we had kept at it and we were trying to make it work.

“As of 2015, when President Buhari came, Nigeria was terribly, terribly divided; divided along religious lines, divided along ethnic lines; divided along language, divided hopelessly, terribly and that is the division that the President had been working at. But you see that a lot of people instead of letting harmony return to this country, thrive and luxuriate in widening the gulf. They play politics with everything.”

Well, in Kaduna, the government has put its surgical knives where its mouth is: a man rapes, gets convicted, and if he does not appeal, he becomes a eunuch and ends up in prison for life, or die! What a clinical finishing to a heinous crime

The female convicts don’t go free. On conviction, for the offence of rape of a child, the Court shall punish the accused with Bilateral Salpingectomy and death.

Many men have often complained they were raped by aunties, househelps, and others as children, but official complaints have been hard to come by in this area, researchers say.

In the bill signed into law by Governor Nasir el Rufai, it is quite simple: it states, “Whoever commits rape of a child below the age of fourteen (14) years shall on conviction, be punished with Surgical Castration and death.

“Whoever has sexual intercourse with a male child below the age of fourteen years shall be punished with surgical castration and death.

Even rape of an adult, in this case above 14 years of age, leads to castration and life imprisonment in the law el Rufai signed on Wednesday.

“Where the convict is a child, the Court shall order as appropriate under the Children and Young Person Law Cap 26 Laws of Kaduna State 1991.

“Where the victim is a child, the Court shall in addition to the conviction, order that the convict be listed in the Sex Offenders Register to be published by the Attorney General.

“Where the Court is trying the offence of rape involving a child below the age of fourteen years, corroboration of a medical report shall be necessary. The Kaduna State Penal Code (Amendment) Law 2020 amends the Penal Code Law (No.5) of Kaduna State, 2017 by substituting section 258 as follows…” (everyday)

A viral video has shown live cattle and farmlands being helplessly washed downstream uncontrollably by flood many allege arose from a break in one of Nigeria’s oldest hydroelectric power dams, Kainji Dam.

But managers of the dam say it is not because of a collapse.

The Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC) confirmed that the integrity of Kainji Dam is “intact and that the facility is operating flawlessly”.

The confirmation is contained in a statement signed by Mr Chidi Izuwah, Director-General and Chief Executive Officer, ICRC on Tuesday, in Abuja.

Izuwah said that the attention of ICRC was drawn “to very dangerous fake news circulating about Kainji Dam”.

“As part of the Power Sector reforms Kainji Hydro-power Facilities were concession-ed to Mainstream Energy Solutions.

“Mainstream’s responsibility include safe custody of the entire dam structure and appurtenances.

“The ICRC, being the statutory agency responsible for pre and post contract regulation of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) and concessions, has continued regular technical and other compliance monitoring of the Kainji Concession.

“The ICRC wants to confirm that the integrity of Kainji Dam is intact and the facility is operating flawlessly and injecting lowest cost power to the national grid,” he said.

Izuwah said ICRC conducted a compliance monitoring visit before the COVID-19 pandemic on the dam and all aspects were inspected and tested.

“We thoroughly inspected the Dam Crest, Reservoir, Embankment Rip Rap, Dam Toe, Toe Drain, Piezometers, Spillway, Stilling Basin, Power House etc.

“Furthermore Kainji has one of the most sophisticated real time inflow prediction and reservoir basin management systems.

“This computer based system, with feeder monitors on the upstream and downstream stretches, is designed to ensure world class hydraulics flow management for dam, upstream and downstream safety management.”

The director-general further explained what an embankment collapse of the dam meant and its implications for the nation.

“Kainji Dam impounds over 16 billion litres of water. Embankment collapse means the dam structure is breached leading to loss of containment of the impounded water.

“Embankment collapse will result in what is called a dam break wave.

“Most empirical hydraulic models will show that everything probably some decent distance on both banks of the niger from kainji dam location to the sea will be washed away.

“A dam break wave is very similar to a Tsunami wave but is not of seismic origin.”

He added that an embankment collapse of the dam would “probably be the biggest disaster to hit Nigeria”.

Izuwah further assured Nigerians that Kainji was safe and advised them to ignore the fake news on the dam.

“We advised all Nigerians to please kindly check the status of our PPP and concession projects on the ICRC disclosure portal or directly with the Commission.”

▪︎ Additional reports by NAN

Amid reports that the United States Government has placed a visa restriction on Kaduna State Governor, Nasir el-Rufai, at least 7,000 people have signed a petition calling on the United Kingdom and the European Union to follow suit.

The petition, which was initiated by a former Presidential aide, Reno Omokri, on Tuesday, was addressed to the UK Parliament, the UK Prime Minister, Boris Johnson; Council of the European Union and the European Parliament.

Checks by BarristerNG on Change.Org showed that the petition had hit 11,500 signatures as of 3:39 pm on Wednesday.

Omokri, who initiated the petition, accused el-Rufai of being a threat to the peace and security of Nigeria for many reasons.

He noted that on December 3, 2016, the governor admitted that he paid herdsmen who had been accused of killing several persons.

“Since that admission, there has been an intense escalation of the killings of mostly Christians in Kaduna, and on August 25, 2020, suspected herdsmen abducted seven schoolchildren and their teacher from Prince Academy, in Kaduna. They have not been seen or heard of since then,” Omokri said.

Omokri, who was a social media aide to former President Goodluck Jonathan, said el-Rufai on January 27, 2013, insulted Jesus Christ on Twitter

The petition further read, “On February 6, 2019, he threatened foreign observers, including observers from the EU and UK with death, warning that they would return in body bags should they intervene in Nigeria.

“On July 15, 2012, Nasir El-Rufai said, and I quote ‘We will write this for all to read. Anyone, soldier or not that kills the Fulani takes a loan repayable one day no matter how long it takes.’ This threat has been carried out in Southern Kaduna where there is an ongoing genocide of Christians under el-Rufai’s watch.”

Omokri said on August 23, 2019, the governor charged the Anglican Bishop of Zaria province of Kaduna, Abiodun Ogunyemi, for defamation.

“On April 24, 2019, another of his sons, Bashir el-Rufai, described the pogrom against Igbos as sweet.

“It is for this reason that Nigerian citizens call on the government of the United Kingdom and the European Union Presidency to follow the lead of the United States and place a visa ban on Nasir El-Rufai, who is scheming to become Nigeria’s President, to prevent a Rwandan style genocide in Nigeria,” he said.

Attempts to get a response from the governor’s office proved abortive as his Spokesman, Mr. Muyiwa Adekeye, rejected calls and had yet to respond to a text message as of the time of filing this report.

The Nigerian Bar Association had last month invited el-Rufai to speak at its Annual General Conference but the NBA later withdrew the invitation amid several petitions.

The governor has been accused of mismanaging the diversity of Kaduna State which has led to the killings of hundreds of persons mostly in Southern Kaduna.

He was also accused of human rights abuse including ensuring the prolonged and illegal detention of government critics.

The former 2nd Vice President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Monday Ubani Esq, files an action in court challenging the unilateral amendment of the rules of professional conduct for lawyers by the Attorney General of the Federation.

In a suit, commenced by Originating Summons, the former 2^nd Vice President of NBA, and a human rights activist, based in Lagos, is challenging the powers of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice of the Federation, as the president of the General Council of the Bar, to unilaterally make and or amend the rules of professional conduct for lawyers.

In the said Originating Summons, filed by the human rights activist, he is seeking the determination of the following questions by the Federal High Court:

1. Whether given the combined provisions and proper interpretation of sections 6(6b), 36(1) and Section 251(q&r), of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, as amended, section 23A, of the Legal Practitioners Act, which prohibits and removes the right of action or access to court by any person with respect to the management of the affairs of the Nigerian Bar Association, is not inconsistent with the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended.
2. Whether by a community reading and proper interpretation of the provisions of sections 1(1&2) and 12(4) of the Legal Practitioners Act, which created and donated to the General Council of the Bar, the powers and responsibility of making rules of professional conduct, for the legal profession, the 1^st Defendant, in its official capacities, as the Attorney General and Minister of Justice of the Federation, and or as president of the General Council of the Bar, can unilaterally, alter, amend and or make any Rules of professional conduct, without a proper meeting of the General Council of the Bar, duly convened, and notices thereof, issued to other members of the General Council of the Bar.
3. Whether given the community reading of sections 1(1&2) and 12(4) of the Legal Practitioners Act, the Attorney General of the Federation, is given any powers to unilaterally make rules of professional conduct or to amend the existing rules of professional conducts for lawyers in Nigeria.

The following reliefs were also sought before the court:

1. A DECLARATION, of this honourable court, that the provisions of section 23A of the Legal Practitioners Act, as amended, is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, and therefore null, void and of no effect whatsoever, to the extent of its inconsistency with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended.
2. AN ORDER of this honourable court deleting or expunging section 23A, of the Legal Practitioners Act, as amended, for being inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended.
3. A DECLARATION that the Attorney General of the Federation, lacks the capacity, powers or vires to unilaterally make, amend and or alter the provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct for legal practitioners, 2007, in his personal or official capacities, as the Attorney General of the Federation and or as president of the General Council of the Bar, without the input of other members of the General Council of the Bar, in a meeting duly convened and notices of the said meeting properly issued and served on the members of the General Bar Council.
4. A DECLARATION by this honourable court that the decisions and resolutions with respect to the management of the affairs of the Nigerian Bar Association, by the General Council of the Bar, especially, as it relates to the making of, and or amendment of the rules of professional conduct, can only be reached, or taken, in a meeting of the General Council of the Bar, properly convened by the Bar Council, through invitations, timely issued and served on all members of the General Bar Council.
5. AN ORDER of this honourable court, declaring the unilateral amendment and the gazetting, of Rules, 9(2),10,11,12 and 13, of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007,on the 3^rd of September 2020, via the statutory instrument No 15 of 2020, by the 1^st Defendant herein, as illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and therefore null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
6. AN ORDER OF PERPETUAL INJUNCTION, restraining the 1^st Defendant, whether by itself in its official capacity or personal capacity, its agents, servants, employees, or howsoever and by whatever name called, from unilaterally altering, amending and or making rules of professional conduct for Legal Practitioners in Nigeria.
7. FOR SUCH FURTHER OR OTHER ORDERS OR RELIEFS as this honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this case.

He contends that given the composition of the General Council of the Bar, as provided for in section 1(2) of the Legal Practitioners Act, that the Attorney General and Minister of Justice of the Federation, and the president of the General Council of the Bar, cannot unilaterally purport to amend, the rules of professional conduct without other members of the General Council of the Bar. He further opined  that any amendment of the rules of professional conduct for lawyers in Nigeria, can only be made by the General Council of the Bar, and not by the Attorney General of the Federation, in that capacity or the capacity of the president of the General Council of the Bar.

He further pointed out  that exhibit 1(which is a copy of the amendment of the rules of professional conduct), was clearly and unilaterally made by the 1^st Defendant in his capacities as the Attorney General and Minister of Justice of the Federation and the president of the General Council of the Bar. He argued that given the clear and unambiguous provisions of sections 1(1&2), and 12(4) of the Legal Practitioners Act, the 1^st Defendant alone, in its capacity as the president of the General Council of the Bar, cannot unilaterally amend or make rules of professional conduct for lawyers. Any rules of professional conduct for lawyers, pursuant to sections 1(1&2) and 12(4) of the Legal Practitioners Act, must be made by the General Council of the Bar, who is statutorily empowered by virtue of section 12(4) to make such rules.  He further argued that the express mention of the Bar Council which consist of the Attorney General of the Federation as president, the Attorney General of States, and 20 members of the Association, is a clear indication, that section 12(4)  of the Legal Practitioners Act, never envisaged a situation where the 1^st Defendant will amend the rules unilaterally in any capacity whatsoever. It was further his submission that in law, the express mention of a thing is an express exclusion of the things not mentioned.

It was further argued in the said suit, that paragraph 1, of the Exhibit 1, clearly show that the 1^st Defendant was wielding powers, not conferred on it by section 12(4) of the Legal Practitioner Act or any other law whatsoever. The opening paragraph of exhibit 1, provided as  follows:

In exercise of the powers conferred on me by section 12(4) of the Legal Practitioners Act, Cap L11, Laws of the Federation,2004 and all other powers enabling me in that behalf, I, Abubakar Mallamai,SAN, Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice and President General Council of the Bar, make the following rules…”

It was further argued that by virtue of sections 1(1&2) and 12(4) of the Legal Practitioners Act, no powers were donated on the 1^st Defendant to either make, or amend the rules of professional conduct for legal practitioners. The powers to make or amend the rules of professional conduct were donated to the General Council of the Bar, which consists of not just the1st Defendant, but Attorney General of States and twenty members of the Association, by section 12(4) of the Legal Practitioners Act. Consequently, every rule of professional conduct made pursuant to section 12(4) of the Legal Practitioners Act, can only be made by the General Council of the Bar, and not by the 1^st Defendant who has no such powers. The court was referred to the case of AHMED v. ABU & ANOR(2016) LPELR-40261(CA), where the Court of Appeal held as follows:

It is now firmly settled that where a statute confers specific power on any person or authority for the performance of certain acts or duty it is only that person or authority and no other person that is contemplated in the performance of the acts or duty under the relevant Law. Only that person and none other can do that assignment and in strict compliance with the power vested in him by the relevant statute. Anything short of this cannot be endorsed by the Law. GARBA V. UNIVERSITY OF MAIDUGURI (1986) 1 NWLR (PT.18) 550, EMUZE C. V. UNIVERSITY OF BENIN (2003) 10 NWRL (PT.825) 328. In BAMIGBOYE V. UNILORIN (1999) 6 SCNJ 295, the Supreme Court re-stated the Law, thus:- “The person to whom on office is delegated cannot lawfully devolve the duty upon another unless he be expressly authorized to do so …”Per AMINA AUDI WAMBAI ,J.C.A ( P. 29, paras. A-E )

He further argued that where a statutory requirement for the exercise of a legal authority is laid down, it is expected that the public body invested with such authority would follow the requirement to the details. The non-observance in the process of reaching any decision renders the decision itself a nullity. BAMIGBOYE V. UNIVERSITY OF ILORIN (Supra), YEMISI V. FIRS (2012) LPELR CA/AK/02/2010.The position of the law, is that every action founded on a void act, is also bad and incurably bad. You cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stand. We refer my Lord to the case of Macfoy V UAC Ltd (1962) AC 152 at 160.

The Court was urged to declare the unilateral amendment and the gazetting, of Rules, 9(2),10,11,12 and 13, of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007, on the 3^rd of September 2020, via the statutory instrument No 15 of 2020, by the 1^st Defendant, as illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional, ultra vires, and therefore null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

Nkem Okoro, who jointly filed the action with Monday Ubani Esq, said they also asked the court to declare the provisions of section 23A of the Legal Practitioners Act, as unconstitutional for taking away the right of access to court by lawyers.

No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.