By Dr. Tonye Clinton Jaja

Dear Prof. Odinkalu, Sir,

Many thanks for your recent article on the subject matter of the independence of the Nigerian legal profession. It is published online at ttps://lawandsocietymagazine.com/how-to-stand-tall-for-an-independent-bar/

The current leadership of the Nigerian Bar Association-NBA is compromised and lacks the moral authority to lead an independent Bar because of the saga of the ₦300,000,000 received from the Rivers State government of Governor Fubara.

As an alternative, many Nigerian lawyers had hoped that Chief JK GADZAMA SAN and his NLS would provide a welcome relief.

However, the Federal High Court, Abuja, is now looking into the debacle of the last NLS election of public officers that held in July 2025.

Ironically, Chief JK GADZAMA SAN ran the NLS on the platform and promises of righting the wrongs that the NBA’s electoral process was fraught with, such as rigging and other allegations.

So as it stands now, institutionally, the Nigerian legal profession is IRREDEEMABLY FLAWED.

It appears that the remedy is to adopt the South African model to an independent legal profession.

In South Africa, they have six professional Associations of lawyers apart from the Bar Association and Law Society of South Africa, respectively.

They established a professional Association of independent lawyers. Their website is available online at https://www.ialpsa.co.za/

This is the kind of professional association led by lawyers such as Femi Falana SAN, who are the true embodiment of the virtues and qualities of independence of the Nigerian legal profession.

Lawyers who can speak truth to power and demand accountability from officials of any government in power, as did the late Chief Gani Fawehimi, SAN.

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.

By Suyi Ayodele

Rome’s history offers timeless lessons for all nations to jealously guard their freedom. Consider one of its emperors, Caligula. Born Gaius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, he reigned from AD 37 to AD 41. Known as Little Boots, Caligula’s four-year reign epitomised tyranny.

Albert Camus captured his ruthlessness in his 1938 play “Caligula,” while Stephen Dando-Collins’ 2019 book, “Caligula: The Mad Emperor of Rome,” and Kate Zusmann’s article, “Roman Emperor Caligula: The Mad Tyrant of Rome,” give vivid portraits of his excesses.

Zusmann wrote: “Caligula’s reign lasted only four years, but his cruel and unpredictable behavior earned him a reputation as one of the most notorious emperors in Roman history… He engaged in construction projects to emphasize his power and divine status. He humiliated senators by forcing them into menial tasks or public spectacles.”

Though he initially presented himself as a noble leader, he soon became Rome’s worst emperor. He wielded taxation and reckless spending as weapons of control.

One account records: “Caligula squandered 2.7 billion sesterces in his first year and addressed the deficit by confiscating estates, levying fines, and even imposing the death penalty to seize wealth. He crippled the Roman Senate in the process.” Freed from opposition, he built an extravagant bridge at Baiae and introduced crippling taxes on everything—taverns, artisans, slaves, food, litigation, weddings, even prostitutes and their pimps. Taxes doubled in just four years, leaving ordinary Romans broken and resentful.

Is this not eerily familiar? In some places in Nigeria today, task force agents harass even mourners transporting corpses. They must pay the state.

Caligula’s Rome is a warning. When opposition disappears, tyranny grows unchecked, and taxation becomes limitless. Nigeria is already on that path.

Read this report: “It was gathered that governors on the shopping list of the APC include the Enugu State governor, Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, Bayelsa State governor, Douye Diri, Plateau State governor, Caleb Muftwang and the Zamfara State governor, Alhaji Dauda Lawal.”

That was how the Nigerian Tribune concluded its lead story on page five of its Monday, August 25, 2025, edition, titled: “Tension grips PDP leaders as APC targets more govs.” Two riders followed: “South-East, South-South, North-Central govs on shopping list” and “Tinubu to receive another PDP gov on arrival.”

An average student of Nigeria’s political history should be deeply troubled by this report. The concern is not just the well-known fact that Nigeria’s political elite rarely show fidelity to principles, loyalty, or decency, but rather the imminent danger this trend poses to the survival of democracy and to the ordinary masses.

We must ask ourselves: what awaits the common man if Nigeria slides into a one-party state? Can the current wielder of power—the architect of this emerging no-opposition order—truly manage such a system? If today, under the pretense of multiparty democracy, impunity has already reached its peak, what happens when there is no one left to challenge those in power?

History warns us that we are about to repeat our mistakes. Nigeria has a peculiar habit of forgetting her sordid past. Some call it resilience; I disagree. What we parade as resilience is actually a battered psyche. Nigerians have been beaten into submission by those who weaponized poverty. With crumbs thrown here and there, leaders get away with political robbery. We have been conquered.

The sages warned us that thunder must not be allowed to strike twice in the same place. Their reasoning was simple: if bad history repeats itself, its second coming will be catastrophic—so tragic that no one will have the words to describe it.

That Nigeria is gradually sliding into a one-party state should raise the alarm. Euphemism has no place here. A one-party Nigeria under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is an invitation to disaster. The consequences will not stop with the opposition; even those within the president’s inner circle will eventually taste the venom. Tyrants spare no one—not even their favourites. We are headed down that perilous road.

Make no mistake: a one-party state will kill this democracy. It has happened before—not once, but twice. Some of us lived through it, others read about it. Nigeria lost two republics because those in power chose tyranny and crushed opposition.

The First Republic collapsed when the ruling Northern Peoples Congress (NPC) attempted to monopolise political power. It formed alliances, coerced defections, and silenced dissent. Opposition leaders were detained on trumped-up charges. Resistance sparked the violent Operation Wetie in Western Nigeria in 1962. By January 15, 1966, the First Republic was dead.

What followed were the January and July 1966 coups, and then a 30-month civil war that consumed over two million lives. Yet, we learnt nothing. When the chance came again in 1979, we squandered it.

By mid-1982, the ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN) had perfected its plan to decimate opposition. It swallowed the PRP in Kano and Kaduna, captured the NPP in old Anambra, and went after the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). Oyo and Bendel fell to its onslaught, while only Ondo resisted—and that resistance produced bloodshed. By December 1983, the Second Republic collapsed, swept away by the military coup of Major-General Muhammadu Buhari. For the next 16 years, Nigeria was under the jackboot.

Whichever way we spin it, the truth is clear: the destruction of opposition in both the First and Second Republics laid the foundation for their collapse.

Those who defend the current defections as freedom of association miss the point. We are not disputing that right. What we warn against is the danger of acquiescing while political and economic power concentrate in the hands of one man. As Aesop warned: “Those who voluntarily put power into the hands of a tyrant must not wonder if it be at last turned against themselves.”

Those who think they can collaborate with the ruling party, pledging loyalty in opposition but serving power in secret, should think again. When tyranny consumes a nation, no one is spared.

ALSO READ: Otu Oka-Iwu Abuja decries divided development, demands justice for Ndi Igbo amid systemic exclusion of Southeast from Nigeria’s future

As the proverb goes, when heaven falls, it falls on everyone; the rain has no enemy.

Caligula reigned until his own guards turned on him. Tyranny and rebellion are monozygotic twins. Let today’s plotters of a one-party Nigeria take note.

Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, in “How Democracies Die” (2018), explain it best: democracies rarely collapse through external invasion. They are destroyed from within, through the slow erosion of norms and the ambitions of authoritarian leaders. Nigeria is walking that path again.

Chude Jideonwo and Adebola Williams, in “How to Win Elections in Africa (2017),” observe that political parties in Nigeria are not built on coherent ideology but on opportunism. The APC, they argue, never stood on any deep philosophy; it merely capitalised on the weaknesses of the PDP. That explains why even serving PDP governors are defecting in droves to join it. But what exactly is the attraction? To answer that, let us revisit one of our old moonlight tales.

Long ago, when animals behaved like humans, Ikún, the deaf squirrel, desired to live as long as mortals. It went to a diviner to seek the Oracle’s blessing.

The divination was swift and stern: for Ikún to live long, it must avoid anything sweet that came from the enemy.

Ikún protested. Why should it shun sweet things when everyone knew it delighted in them?

The Oracle replied with finality: what is sweet kills faster than anything else.

Ikún left, troubled. It wondered who its enemy could be. The only one that came to mind was the groundnut farmer, whose produce it relished. Resolving to obey the warning, Ikún avoided the groundnut farm.

The farmer soon noticed that Ikún no longer raided his crops. Suspicious, he tried several tricks. He attempted to smoke Ikún out of its burrow, but failed—for as elders say, orò burúkú kii ká ikún mólé (misfortune never meets the squirrel at home). He tried hunting it at night, but that too failed—for ikún kii jé l’óru (the squirrel never ventures out at night).

At last, the farmer set a trap, using ripe banana as bait. The fruit was carefully placed over the blade, waiting to spring at the slightest tug.

Not long after, Ikún wandered by and spotted the banana. Overjoyed, it rushed forward. Banana was a delicacy, and its sweetness irresistible. Ikún took a bite, wagged its tail, and forgot all about the Oracle’s warning. It bit again, wagged its tail, and then tried to carry the whole banana away.

In a flash, the trap snapped. Ikún was caught between the jaws of death. Too late, it realised the truth: the sweet gift from the enemy was a lure to destruction. With its dying breath, it remembered the Oracle’s words.

Our elders, who preserved this tale, summed it up in the saying: ikún nje gèdè, ikún nre di; ikún ò mò pé ohun tó dùn mà únpa èniyàn (the squirrel wags its tail while eating banana, not knowing that what is sweet is what kills a man).

And that, precisely, is what the defecting governors are doing today. The banana from the ruling APC is sweet, but beneath its sweetness lies a deadly trap.

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.

By M.O. Idam, Esq.

It is becoming a dangerous era to raise a child in Nigeria. Young people are radicalised daily with unethical teachings flying up and down online—in the name of content.

The impact of these teachings must be waiting for all of us somewhere along the streets of the future.

If there exists no mechanism to police teachings that tend to radicalize the mind and possibly shift human behaviour from ethical norms to unapproved societal standards, then we all must be ready to welcome a generation with a distorted orientation.

One is already freely indoctrinating a sea of Nigerian Youths, another is on her way to start her own. Undoubtedly, several others will follow in no time. By the time they are done, the already morally fragile Nigerian young people would likely be turned to either beasts or wild beings against each other.

The National Universities Commission (NUC) and the Ministry of Education must call these content creators to order now before we wake up to a society where human relationships have turned brutish, short and nasty like the Hobbesian order of nature.

It is not a joke any more!

M.O. Idam

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.

By Jeff Godwin Doki,  Ph.D                                                        

If you must blame the hawk for wickedness, first blame mother-hen for exposing her children to danger. (African Proverb).

It is becoming increasingly clear that, in very recent times, the Nigerian media has become awash with Press statements, comments, and interviews from the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU). The careful observer would have noticed also that ASUU’s recent body language points clearly to only one thing, which is that: the clouds are gathering for yet another heavy ‘downpour’ (show down) between ASUU and the FGN and it would, perhaps, be the first ‘downpour’ since President Bola Ahmed Tinubu took over power in 2023. Central to ASUU’s demands are four key items namely: (1) Renegotiation of the 2009 ASUU-FGN agreement (2) Sustainable funding of Nigerian Universities (3) Revitalization of Nigerian Universities (4) Victimization of Colleagues in LASU, KSU (now Prince Audu University) and FUTO .

For the careful observer who has followed the ASUU-FGN conflict over the past few years, these demands would seem dejavu because most of them have been there for a fairly long period of time and they have been debated, they have been combated, they have been re-emphasized, they have been re-asserted by ASUU as a union. Lamentably, they have simply been ignored and discarded by both past and present Governments in Nigeria. So, what are the demands of ASUU and what are the issues in contention?

The first is the Federal Government’s violation of the Collective Bargaining Principle. For the benefit of the doubt, Collective bargaining is a principle in labor law where there is a written contract between an employer and a trade union in which both sides negotiate to reach a consensus on issues like wages, working hours, benefits and other workplace matters. In other words, Collective bargaining is a process of reaching an agreement where both parties discuss their needs and interests in order to find a common ground. Central to the Collective Bargaining principle is the expectation that once agreed upon, the collective agreement should be implemented by the employer and strictly monitored for compliance.

For the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the first agreement between ASUU and the Federal Government of Nigeria was signed in 1981 under the civilian regime of Alhaji Shehu Shagari. But two years after the agreement, the military took over power from Shagari in 1983. And during the many years of military rule——-especially the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida—— the soldiers embarked on a systematic harassment and intimidation of academic staff and even the arrest and detention of some of its union leaders and outright proscription of the union. But to its credit, it was the same military junta of Gen. Babangida that signed the second agreement with ASUU in 1992. The 1992, Agreement is significant in at least two ways among others.

First, it introduced the Education Tax Fund (ETF) which later metamorphosed to the Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TetFund) in 2011. Second, it has brought about rapid infrastructural development to the tertiary education sector and its presence in all tertiary institutions in Nigeria is something that cannot be missed even by the most indifferent spectator. To all these must be added the fact that TetFund is one of the most glaring and clearest examples of ASUU struggles. But, as is in the nature of authoritarian regimes, the 1992 agreement, beneficial as it was, was summarily truncated by the military junta.

 It is twenty-six years today since the military have retired to the barracks and civilians, who are supposed to be more tolerant and democratic, have been in power. It is the height of irony that all the civilian regimes in Nigeria since 1999 have refused to obey the collective bargaining principle as enshrined in the International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention No. 98 of 1949 and Convention No. 154 of 1981. Consequently, ASUU as a union has lost faith, trust and confidence in the present democratic dispensation.

Fast forward to 2009. In that year also the FGN signed another agreement with ASUU. The Government team was headed by Chief Gamaliel Onosode while ASUU was represented by Dr. Abdullahi Sule who was later replaced by Prof.Ukachukwu Awuzie. Over the years, ASUU has made series of efforts to get the government to renegotiate this very agreement. The efforts of ASUU bore fruits in March, 2017 but sadly the Federal Government has two times turned down the two draft agreements especially the ones headed by Emeritus Prof. Nimi Briggs and the most recent one submitted by the Alhaji Yayale Ahmed committee in February, 2025.

By all standards, the 2009 agreement seems to be more forward-looking because it has great promise and is aimed at addressing thorny issues like funding, salaries and welfare. Government’s refusal to implement or renegotiate the 2009 agreement, therefore, is an abundant testimony of the fact that the Nigerian Government does not care about university education and this is the major reason for the prolonged crisis in the university system. Undoubtedly, the implementation of the 2009 agreement would have provided a solution to the numerous problems bedeviling university education in Nigeria today.

The other key demand of ASUU as a union is funding and revitalization of Nigerian universities. But here again, it could be perceived that these two issues—–funding and revitalization——are also tied to the re-negotiation or implementation of the 2009 agreement. And this is true because Nigerian universities if properly funded would motivate university teachers to conduct research in libraries and well- equipped laboratories. If properly funded, both the university teacher and the student could have access to electronic and physical journals, books, chemicals and reagents.  Former ASUU President and INEC Chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega has captured this unfortunate reality in the following words:

               Inadequate funding limits resources and impacts quality of education

               delivery. Poor infrastructure and overcrowding hinder effective learning

               environments. Training qualified manpower and addressing teacher shortages

               positively affects imparting quality education. Development of technology in

               teaching and research is necessary and requires appropriate investment in

               software and hardware and in training and retraining of necessary staff.

Lest we forget, education remains a basic human right as outlined in article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human rights, article 28 of the Convention on the rights of the child and article 11 of the African charter of the rights and welfare of the child. All these Conventions emphasize the need for the state to provide free and compulsory basic education. But instead of doing this, the Nigerian leadership is more interested in establishing new universities in the country. We find ourselves in a situation where universities are established not for pragmatic reasons but just to score some cheap pollical points. As a matter of fact, the idea of the university as the ‘ivory tower’ has been completely eroded in Nigeria and we fear that one day every Nigerian Senator shall have a university located at his very backyard. Just look at this: there are 72 Federal universities in Nigeria, 108 State universities and 159 private universities.

Add this up and you get a total of 339 universities in just one country (not a region) that allocates a paltry 7% of its total budget to the education sector. In contrast, a country like the United Kingdom has a number of about 130 universities only because it is a country deeply concerned with quality and global recognition. Other examples are the Republic of South Africa which has only 26 universities, East Africa, with 19 countries, has 340 universities and the entire North Africa, with seven or more states, has 360 universities. And this explains why foreign universities are considered among the best in global university rankings. Is it surprising that many Nigerian students flock to foreign universities to acquire higher education? It is in this regard that the National Universities Commission (NUC), has played a quisling role.

It seems clear that the Commission lacks the capacity to effectively perform its role as a regulatory body saddled with the responsibility of enhancing quality in the university system. Rather, the Commission encourages the establishment of private universities charging extortionate fees which are not commiserate to the services offered and which are essentially profit-driven. ASUU’s demand for a review of the laws governing the NUC and JAMB, therefore, is truly justified. In Nigeria, private universities consider their students as customers because of their capacity to pay high charges and fees. At the end of the degree program, students in private universities are compensated with ‘first class’ degrees. It is on record that a private university in Nigeria churned out 150 first class graduands at one convocation ceremony.

Philosophers say that there is nothing so bad that does not carry with it a few good things. As a parenthetical remark, therefore, the recent seven years moratorium on the establishment of universities in Nigeria by the FGN is commendable. Same commendation may go to, Mr. Francis Nwifiru, the Ebonyi state Governor who has recently resolved the lingering crisis in the Ebonyi State University (EBSU) by addressing issues of funding, student’s welfare and the re-opening of the ASUU secretariat in that university. 

Moving away from issues of funding and revitalization is the Nigerian government’s usurpation of the duties of university Senates and Governing Councils. And this brings us to the issue of university autonomy and freedom, another key demand of ASUU. To put it modestly, university autonomy simply means the freedom of a university to manage and govern its own affairs independently and without external interference particularly from the government or its agents. In other words, university autonomy is the freedom for the university to determine or shape its curricula, select or appoint staff (including Vice chancellor), admit students, manage finances and determine research priorities.

Unfortunately, the Nigerian leadership has denied universities this autonomy by constantly meddling into the affairs of both federal and state universities. The most recent example is the Government’s attempt to impose someone whose promotion to the rank of Professor is dubious at the Alvan Ikoku University of Education Owerri. The second recent example is the Government’s deliberate interference in the process of electing a substantive Vice chancellor at the University of Abuja (now Yakubu Gowon University). To all these must be added the victimization of several academic staff in Lagos State Univeristy (LASU), Kogi State University (now Prince Abubakar Audu University) and Federal University of Technology Owerri (FUTO). And this is just a partial list of the universities and the numerous issues at the heart of ASUU’s demands.

For now, it is clear that the FGN has a strong habit of treating ASUU demands with levity and disdain. And it is this kind of attitude that has all the potential of creating endless crises in Nigerian universities. This same attitude leaves one with a millipede of questions: why is the university the target of government animosity? Why has the Nigerian government refused to give the education sector the attention and priority it deserves? Why is the political class in Nigeria insincere in dealing with issues concerning education? The number of questions begging for answers are as long as a railway line. The conclusion is that the Nigerian government has deliberately refused to fund the education sector and this accounts for the monumental rot in the system as well as the unending conflict between ASUU and the FGN.

To put it bluntly, quite often, and in very recent times, the Federal Government has consistently pushed ASUU to embark on avoidable strike actions in Nigeria just to turn back and seize the salaries of ASUU members and create the impression that the union is intransigent and insensitive. I think that the time has come for Parents, teachers, students and other stakeholders in the education sector to hold the FGN responsible for this kind of mischief and hypocrisy which finds memorable expression in the proverbial wisdom of our folks: If you must blame the hawk for wickedness, first blame mother-hen for exposing her children to danger. In other words, should ASUU embark on another strike action in the coming days, the Federal Government should take the blame. 

Jeff Godwin Doki is a writer, public analyst, conflict manager and a Professor of Comparative Literature with the University of Jos, Nigeria.

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.