By Ayodele Adio

The President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr. Olumide Akpata, has demanded that Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, OFR recuses himself as the Chairman of the Body of Benchers after a petition was brought against one Ms. Adekunbi Ogunde, a Partner in his law firm, for “engaging in conduct incompatible with her status as a legal practitioner and in flagrant disregard of our rules of professional conduct.”

Mr. Akpata raised his concern about a potential conflict of interest in a strongly worded letter to Chief Olanipekun stating that “Against the backdrop of your partnership relationship with Ms.0gunde, vis-a-vis the prosecution of the petition by the LPDC, it is clear, albeit unfortunate, that you have been put in a situation where your continued occupancy of the office during this period would conflict, or be reasonably interpreted to conflict, with or influence the processes of the LPDC, by fair-minded observers and right-thinking members of the public, both within and outside our profession. By reason of your close professional ties and involvement with Ms. Ogunde, it would be an infraction of the salutary principles of natural justice for the said Petition to be heard by the LPDC while you continue as Chairman of the BOB, of which the LPDC is a committee.”

It is common knowledge around Nigeria’s legal circles that the LPDC is supervised by the Body of Benchers which raises a moral question of whether justice can truly be seen to be served if he presides, or in this case, supervises the body that will preside over a matter for which he is an interested party. Perhaps, It is to avoid what could be perceived as a tainted process that Mr. Akpata demanded that Chef Olanipekun “to recuse yourself from the chairmanship of the BOB henceforth and to allow for the emplacement of an interim leader of the BOB, in order to enable the LPDC to carry out this particular assignment, amongst others, without coming under an undue suspicion of impartiality.”

On the 20^th of June 2020, Ms. Ogunde Adekunbi, a partner leading the Oil and Gas practice in Wole Olanipekun & Co, sent an email to one Francesco Caio of Saipem offering the services of her firm “in relation to the ongoing $130 million case at the Rivers State High Court, brought by the Rivers State Government against Saipem SPA, Saipem Nigeria and others.”  In the letter to Saipem, Ms. Adekanbi bragged about the competencies of her law firm noting that “I believe you need a more influential lawyer/law firm to prevent a potentially huge payout to the Rivers State Government and without a doubt, I believe that my law firm, Wole Olanipekun & Co, can help in this regard.”

She didn’t stop there. Ms. Ogunde went a step further to flaunt Chief Olanipekun’s credentials and influence noting in her email to SAIPEM that “the presence of Chief Olanipekun SAN, OFR, in the matter, will significantly switch things in favour of SAIPEM.” Additionally, she stated that “Chief Olanipekun SAN, OFR is currently the Chairman of the Body of Benchers, which is the highest ruling body in the Nigerian legal profession, made up of Supreme Court Judges, Presiding Justices of the Court of Appeal and Chief Judges of all State High Courts, including the Rivers State High Court.”

As if this wasn’t damning enough, Ms. Ogunde dispels any possible ambiguity while reeling out the accomplishment of her boss by emphasizing the point to SAIPEM that “you will agree that highly sensitive and political matters require more influence. We are happy to work with the current lawyers to achieve the desired results.” Worth mentioning is that Ms. Ogunde was quite aware that the “current lawyers” she was referring to were those of Ajumogobia & Okeke who had been retained by SAIPEM on the matter.

Three days after this email was delivered to Francesco Caio of SAIPEM from Ms. Ogunde, Mr. Odein Ajumogobia SAN OFR, addressed a strongly worded email to Chief Olanipekun expressing extreme disappointment and utter disillusionment at the letter from Ms. Ogunde. Ajumogobia further described the letter as tantamount to the gross misconduct of the worst kind. Referring to Rule 39 of the Rules of Professional Conduct which states that “a lawyer shall not engage or be involved in any advertising or promotion of his practice of the law which …..makes comparison with or criticizes other lawyers …..or includes any statement about the quality of the lawyer’s work, the size or success of his practice or his success rate,” Ajumogobia noted that “a letter of this nature should emanate from your chambers, given your stature at the bar generally and as the current Chairman of the body of benchers, in particular.”

After also addressing what he described as several defamatory imputations concerning himself and his firm, Ajumogobia demanded: “within 7 days of the date of this letter, a written apology to the firm of Ajumogobia & Okeke from Wole Olanipekun & Co, for this most deplorable conduct of Adekumbi Ogunde and your firm.” Additionally, Ajumogobia demanded “that Wole Olanipekun & Co sends a letter to Saipem the top management to retract your said letter. The retraction and a copy of the apology to my firm must be copied to the top management of Saipem SA and the same recipients as the original email, namely Caio Francesco.”

Responding to Ajumogobia’s letter, James Adesulu and Quam Owolabi, both Associate Counsel at Wole Olanipekun & Co., signed a Disclaimer that essentially threw Ms. Adekanbi under a moving vehicle. The letter read in part; thus, “first, let it be known without equivocation that the said letter was written without the instruction, authority, mandate, approval, or consent of Wole Olanipekun & Co. It was also not brought to our attention by the writer.  It has also not been the practice of our law firm to solicit for cases or clientele and we shall never indulge ourselves in such disturbing practice.” Wole Olanipekun & Co also noted that “the practice in our law firm is that before any letter goes out, it must be cleared in-house and jointly attested to or signed by two counsels. In effect, the writer of the letter under reference was on her own.”

Although Wole Olanipekun & Co dissociated themselves from the letter under reference, the firm extended an apology to Ajumogobia & Okeke noting that “our principal values and covets the very cordial, professional and friendly relationship between both of you – a relationship that has stood the time for over three decades.” Chief Olanipekun has also in a recent statement obtained by The Nigerian Lawyer, claimed that he is yet to be served a copy of Akpats’s letter and that “it appeared there was an ulterior motive behind the action of the NBA president.

Recall that in February this year, Mr. Lucius Nwosu SAN had petitioned the Nigerian Bar Association to restrain Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN from bidding for the chairmanship of the Body of Benchers. In a letter dated February 17, 2022, Mr. Nwosu accused Chief Olanipekun of “engaging in unprofessional conduct contrary to section 3 of the Legal Practitioners Act Cap L 11, which provides that a BOB member should be of the highest distinction in the legal profession.” Mr. Nwosu in his letter to the NBA further referenced the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court condemning Chief Olanipekun “wherein Amina Augie, justice of the court, while delivering judgment in the case of “Biobarakuma Degi Eremienyo & Ors Vs. Peoples Democratic Party & Ors”, berated Olanipekun for seeking a review of the court’s judgment on the Bayelsa state governorship election.”

Additionally, Mr. Nwosu pointed out that “there is no parallel in recorded judicial history in this country where a senior lawyer is mulcted with humongous costs of N30,000,000 and ordered to be paid personally by himself,” also noting that “he (Chief Olanipekun) has defiantly refused to pay the costs awarded by the supreme court as at my last inquiry, not that it would have made a difference if he had paid same.”

Reacting to the petition and possible prosecution by the NBA President, a respected lawyer and Senior Advocate, Mr. Yomi Aliyu stated that “President Akpata, una do well ooooo! Yoruba lawyers shall be there in full force to defend our leader and Primus inter Peres! No Yoruba son shall ever be made a sacrificial lamb like it was done to Kunle Kalejaiye SAN!  Call it what you like! Tribalism! Yes! What an insult! We are Yorubas before we are Nigerians!”

It is important to point out that the said Kunle kalejaiye SAN was in 2015 stripped of the SAN rank by the Legal Practitioners and Disciplinary Committee following allegations that he exchanged text messages with an election tribunal judge, Thomas Naron, during the election litigation between former Governor Olagunsoye Oyinlola and Rauf Aregbesola.

Mr. Aliyu’s comments are highly unprofessional and embarrassing, another senior lawyer who spoke to the Avalon Daily anonymously. Deeply shocked and embarrassed by Mr. Aliyu’s tribal comments, the lawyer, also a Yoruba man asked, “did I sign up to become a member of the Nigerian bar or the Yoruba bar?”

Commenting on the NBA’s petition in a brief interview with the Avalon Daily, Mr. Yemi Candide-Johnson SAN who is a former President of the Lagos Court of Arbitrators stated that “Wole Olanipekun is a leading Nigerian lawyer and recognized by many important offices as a leader of the profession. It is of the utmost importance that such an individual always conducts himself and regulates his practice in a manner that is exemplary.

Any implication that he acts below optimum standards makes his position, especially as chairman of an important professional organ untenable. In the face of public allegations of egregious professional misconduct, I would expect him to defend the profession first before himself and accordingly to resign from the office that leads the profession. It’s a matter of responsibility and of honour.

The appearance of corruption by itself is deeply damaging. My own view generally is that nobody is above the law and the bane of our profession to this time has been that the most senior are often the most badly behaved. It is intolerable and unsustainable. The law and its due and proper administration is more important than any individual.”

In this paper presented at the FAMA FIRM virtual conference on “Contemporary issues facing the welfare of young lawyers in Nigeria and possible solutions” by fiery Law Teacher, SYLVESTER UDEMEZUE, he strives to plot a roadmap for Nigeria’s young lawyers on how to surmount the myriad of challenges besetting them in the legal services industry.

NIGERIAN YOUNG LAWYERS, THEIR MANY CHALLENGES, AND THE WAY OUT OF THE DOLDRUMS

At the FAMA FIRM’s LAW WEBINAR where the problems and welfare of the Nigerian young lawyer took the Centre stage, I (as a one of the main speakers) tried to identify some of the problems facing the young lawyer in Nigeria, and I made efforts to also advance some recommendations on the way out of the doldrums, in the best interest of young lawyers and the law profession.

For the many challenges the young lawyer faces in Nigeria, I respectfully held the following people and organizations blameful/responsible (each to a certain degree):

1. The Young Lawyer himself/Herself— Lack of proper orientation on the things that really matter within and outside the profession; obsession with inane materialism; excessive greed; acute impatience; lack of proper commitment and self-preparation; low self-development efforts; poor reading culture; obsession with negative comparison; lack of objectiveness in decision-making during Bar elections which leads, sometimes, to enthronement of wrong leaders; failure or refusal to cooperate with, or support incumbent Bar leaderships at all levels; mentality of over-dependence on others (looking for apple instead of focusing on learning how to pluck the apples yourself); improper packaging (your packaging determines the level of treatment you get from others); improper focus on money instead of work which is what would eventually yield you greater dividends; excessive desperation; lack of humility; engagement in delinquent behaviors; distorted and disjointed attitude to life and value system, selfishness and egoism, etc.
2. The Society in which the young lawyer has found himself/herself — bad and corrupt governance, gullible and docile followership, degraded society, poor economy, social dislocation, low support infrastructure, etc.
3. Successive leadership of the Bar Association over the years — failure of NBA leaderships to work hard to stop/reduce incessant encroachment into the legal practice space by non-lawyers; failure to initiate necessary legal reforms that would ensure expansion of the employment base for legal practitioners in order to create more employment and make lawyers more relevant to society (most lawyers look for work only in law firms thereby creating more pressure and are subjected to undue exploitation, harassment, and poor treatment, etc: law firms would appreciate and pay lawyers more (to discourage them from leaving) if the firms see fewer lawyers to employ); NBA has not focused on the real needs of the young lawyer (trying to fix a minimum wage for privately-owned Law firms is mere pursuit of the impossible; come off it and focus on the realizable, more beneficial things); segregation and division within the various segments of the profession lead to acrimony and lack of proper focus; NBA and its members give very little support to legal education institutions in Nigeria; failure to secure a better deal for lawyers in the society, compared to members of other professions (medical profession has a better deal because their leadership had worked for it), NBA has not created proper avenues for robust engagement and deliberations on the challenges facing the young lawyer and the profession in general (except in few instances, the periods and sessions during NBA Annual Conferences are usually entirely dissipated/wasted on discussing matters that have little or NO relevance to the welfare and promotion of lawyers, the legal profession and the young lawyers in particular; we won’t know how to solve our problems if we don’t have proper avenues of identifying and and discussing them comprehensively); etc
4. Employers of (Law) Labour — sexual and other harassment by bosses due partly to desperation and improper conduct (dressing, etc) on the part of young lawyers, and also due to the randy nature of some employers; undue exploitation by employers; improper/inadequate remuneration and welfare packages for employees; unconducive work environment; lack of proper involvement, engagement, poor employer leadership examples, poor employee-motivation etc.
5. Our Learned Senior Colleagues — incessant intimidation and bullying of young lawyers which tend to put the young lawyers off, discourage them and sometimes frustrate them out of the profession; most of our seniors don’t lead by good example, most seniors don’t provide proper support and encouragement to juniors, selfishness by seniors, etc.
6. Educational Institutions—- starting from secondary schools and universities, we need to take education of our youth much more seriously; Council of Legal Education (CLE) should tighten the noose on Law Faculties to force them to re-double their efforts at training lawyers; Guidance and Counseling should be made a necessary part of the curriculum both at the secondary and university level, and indeed all levels, etc.
7. Regulatory Institutions within the legal profession— each regulator hardly lives up to its responsibilities and the expectations of lawyers generally , inefficiency and corruptions, nepotism, little or no partnership among core regulators, etc.
8. Individual Luck: Not everyone would be rich or well-to-do; if you try to be faster than your shadow, you may crash. Hard work is a condition precedent to success; but not everyone who works hard that must succeed. Accordingly, while you work hard to be the best, try and make allowance for some failure or ill-luck because you don’t know what the future holds in store for you. Hope and work for the best, but be prepared for the worst, sometimes; life might not be a bed of roses; challenges are a part of life. Our destinies aren’t the same. Learn how to approach failure and delays. Some were born great; some have greatness foisted upon them; but some must work very hard to achieve greatness. Yet, there are others who spent an entire lifetime working for greatness, but unsuccessfully; such is life. If you lose sight of this fact, you may miss your steps.
9. Parents and Guardians: not everyone is cut out to be a lawyer; some force their children or wards on the profession; let parents subject their children and wards for proper guidance and counseling before allowing them to study law. Don’t push your child to study law; let the decision be wholly voluntary, based on proper counseling. Some lawyers HAVE NO BUSINESS coming into the profession. They just can’t cope, however anyone tries to help them. They’re square pegs in round holes; Legal Missorts!
10. Poor Justice Administration System: corrupting, ineptitude and especially chronic delays in justice dispensation in Nigeria are a great source of frustration and discouragement for the young lawyers.

I proffered a number of solutions, which are contained in my paper (to be shared shortly). I then concluded: the solution to the young lawyer’s problems must begin (but not end) with the young lawyer himself/herself: an altogether new mode of thinking; improved reading culture; hard work; more commitment to the profession and work; patience; selflessness; radical reorientation; eschew materialism and negative comparative analysis; the dependence-mentality; focus all your energy on work, not money, and money will come; proper self-packaging (you don’t need much money to properly package/market yourself; but you need proper packaging to get the money you need, and to make it in the profession); develop the attitude of selfless service (how you serve others determines how far you can go in the profession); personal development; networking; flee from all forms of evil because KARMA and RETRIBUTION are REAL; stay away from money politics during bar elections so you can get the right leadership,; support every incumbent NBA leadership (even if your candidate during elections lost/loses the election (it a civic responsibility), etc.

As I have said, I will make my paper available for public consumption and to continue the discussion.

Respectfully,
Sylvester Udemezue (udems)

Credit:citylawyermag

By Bayo Akinlade Esq

 INTRODUCTION

More than 70% of all legal disputes are handled by lower courts in Nigeria. This is because over 80% of our population are middle and lower-class citizens whose disputes fall within the jurisdiction of the lower courts.

 ACCESS TO JUSTICE

Most Nigerians are denied access to justice because of the lack of basic infrastructure at the lower courts, insufficient magistrates, and other vices.

At least every local council area should have a magistrate court but that’s not the case in most parts of Nigeria and we wonder why there is so much insecurity and lawlessness.

 CIVIL AND CRIMINAL JURISDICTION OF LOWER COURTS

Most, if not all tenancy matters are within the jurisdiction of magistrate Courts

All commercial transactions below 10 million naira (at least for Lagos State) are resolved in the lower courts

All customary marriages and small disputes are handled by customary courts

All Criminal cases that do not attract capital punishments can be tried in a magistrate court.

It goes without saying that our lower courts play perhaps a more fundamental role in maintaining peace and order in our communities than our superior courts.

 DID YOU KNOW?

Do some magistrates earn less than 200k per month?

At retirement, some of them may not earn more than 20k in pension and gratuity per month?

Many of them don’t have vehicles and cannot afford one if not provided for by the Executive Arm of Government?

They handle sensitive cases on tenancy issues but some of them cannot afford to pay rent for a decent apartment?

The average magistrate handles 10 to 30 matters a day and sits for 4 to 8 hours a day without taking a break

They handle sensitive criminal cases but do not have any protection from the criminal underworld

And so much more

 THE CALL

We call upon our State Legislators and respective State Chief Judges to put heads together and come up with a reasonable package for Judges of our Lower Courts.

We have heard the uproar from our Supreme Court Justices, we have seen the outcome of a recent judgement increasing the salaries of superior court judges BUT WE LEFT OUT THE MOST IMPORTANT SET OF JUDGES AND THOSE ARE THE JUDGES THAT KEEP NIGERIA SAFE AND SECURE … WE LEFT OUT THE MAGISTRATES AND THE CUSTOMARY COURT JUDGES.

 The Welfare of our Lower Court Judges Matters!

SUPPORT OUR LOWER COURTS

 Bayo Akinlade Esq

 Citizens Support for Lower Courts Initiative

By Emmanuel Jakpa

There is a great, big moral battle ongoing for the soul of the Nigerian Bar Association. And everyone is invited to pick a side. By not picking a side, you are picking a side, it is the nature of moral battles.

On Sunday Chief Wole Olanikpekun gave an interview in the Vanguard newspapers, where he accused the President of the NBA, Mr. Olumide Akpata of an ulterior motive in writing a letter to him and leaking it to the press before he (the Chief) had a chance to see the letter.

Since then a number of senior advocates have toed the line, singing from the same hymn sheet that what the President of the NBA did was wrong. One faceless individual was alleged to have said, “it is only in oyinbo land that somebody will quit his job because there is a mere call by somebody who appears to have an ulterior motive in writing that letter.” Lagbaja, it appears you have forgotten this is an oyinbo profession, the last time I checked there were no lawyers let alone senior advocates in my village union. I don’t know about yours.

The legal profession is a foreign, imported commodity and we ought to look at the owner’s manual when using it, for our own safety. It is essentially this manual that dictates “nemo judex in causa sua.” That doesn’t sound like any Nigerian language I know of. But if you know the local translation, please let me have it.

More the surprise therefore is the fact that several senior advocates of Nigeria have gone on record to excoriate the President of the NBA for allegedly leaking the letter addressed to the Chairman of Body of Benchers Chief Wole Olanikpekun.

I don’t know whether they are right to lay the accusation without hearing from the man. But the information available is that a copy of the letter was delivered to the Secretary of the BOB and to the emails of every member of the BOB. That immediately implies that there are at least two possible sources of a leak; from the President of the NBA’s side of the fence or from the Secretariat of the BOB’s side of the fence.

None of the senior advocates of Nigeria who have gone on record to excoriate the NBA President has demonstrated to us how they eliminated one of at least two possibilities to arrive at their unequivocal conclusion that it was the President of the NBA that leaked the letter.  Our understanding of legal procedure was that you analysed the facts before your applied the law – I think they used to teach it under the rubric IRAC or something.

Anyways, what that means is that the learned silks and members of the Body of Benchers ought to call for an investigation of the source of leak, if they are so concerned about a leak and if there is any rule that was offended by the alleged leak.

But I will point in a different direction. Just a couple of weeks ago, 14 justices of the supreme court were alleged to have authored a far more devastating letter to the Chief Justice of Nigeria alleging the highest level of malfeasance. The letter in circulation was even unsigned, which points in only one possible direction for source of leak.

Did the embattled CJN react by calling the other justices names and questioning their motives for leaking a document before they signed and sent it to him? I don’t recall that particular episode, if it ever occurred. Pardon my lapse of memory.

I think the learned senior advocates and members of BOB may have more serious things to do, like worry about the state of our legal profession and the moral underpinnings of the profession (or business as I hear some say it is in entirety). Even as business there should be some rules.

The allegation against Chief Olanikpekun’s partner is that she was seeking to attract business away from an already briefed counsel and not by some savoury means. The letter is in the public domain if you enjoy salacious details. It was directed at the business of another senior advocate. What happens where there are no rules in business? Does anyone know? It seems it becomes banditry, that favourite pastime of a few that has nearly brought this nation to its knees.

So if you are a fence sitter, you are wrong.

I believe if the process is allowed to play out properly we will get to the bottom of this issue in a manner that is fair to all.

The diversionary tactics being employed bodes no good for the legal profession in Nigeria and you know it.

Emmanuel Jakpa, Esq.

About a week ago, the National Industrial Court, sitting in Abuja, directed the federal government of Nigeria to increase the salaries of all judicial officers in the country. In a landmark judgment delivered by the Honourable Justice Osatohanmwen Obaseki-Osaghae, the government was ordered to commence a monthly payment of N10 million to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), N9 million to other Justices of the Supreme Court and the President of the Court of Appeal, N8 million to the Justices of the Court of Appeal and the Chief Judges of the Federal High Court and High Court of the States, Heads of the Sharia Court of Appeal and the President of the Customary Court of Appeal, while other judges of the Federal High Court, the State High Courts, Sharia Court and the Customary Court will earn N7 million, in that order. In addition, the Court held that the federal government shall continue to carry out a yearly or once in two years review of the salaries and allowances of all judicial officers. In its judgment, the court held that the refusal of the government to review the salaries and allowances of judicial officers for fourteen years was unconstitutional, unlawful, adding that the National Industrial Court has the power to compel the government to do the needful.

The judgment of the Court is sequel to the suit filed by renown author and legal luminary, Dr. Sebastine Hon, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, against the National Assembly, Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Allocation Commission, Attorney-General of the Federation and the National Judicial Council as the 1st to 4th defendants, respectively. In his affidavit in support of the case, Dr. Hon, SAN stated that as a legal practitioner who has practiced in all the levels of courts in Nigeria, he was aware that the poor pay for judicial officers is seriously affecting the quality of judgments and rulings being delivered and also the discharge of other functions associated with their office. He stated further that the current economic reality in the country requires that the salaries and allowances of judges be improved upon, urgently. The Claimant noted that the highest paid judicial officer in Nigeria, the CJN, currently earns about N3.4 million per annum, far below what is earned by such an officer in other countries. While quoting what all judicial officers currently earn as provided under Part IIB of the Schedule to the Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders (Salaries and Allowances, etc) Amendment Act 2008, Dr. Hon, SAN averred that the said paltry sums have discouraged him from aspiring to become a judge.

I have described the commendable efforts of Dr. Hon, SAN as a lifeline for the judges because it is long overdue. We have heard lamentations and complaints from judicial officers during their valedictory speeches, at times embarrassingly, on the state of wanton neglect of the judiciary. The judiciary remains one of the gateways to the economic progress of any nation as the mode and time of resolution of legal disputes are key issues to consider in investment decisions and also part of the indices for determining the ease of doing business. For anyone who has experienced the near-drowning syndrome while swimming or in accident situations, it is always a matter of lapping on to any and all things for immediate rescue or else life is gone. The appalling situation of the judiciary in Nigeria is not so very well appreciated by many. Without mentioning names, there are judges who buy their own generators and fuel them in order to discharge their duties. Some buy stationery and even help to augment the meagre take home pay of those working with them in the courts. Some other judges have no drivers whilst some have no official accommodation. And do you know that when judges retire from service, they become orphans and their pension is not paid as and when due? It got so bad that a retired judge in Lagos recently had to approach the court to get the government to pay his pension. When those of them in service get to hear of such neglect, how do you think they will react? The judiciary had long been in urgent need of the kind of lifeline that Dr. Hon, SAN threw at them, for their survival and for the survival of Nigeria. We cannot pretend about that.

For the lifeline to be of any value however, it must go with autonomy and independence for judges, especially at the State High Courts, where the muzzling of judicial officers by the executive arm of government has reached an epidemic proportion. What this has done is to turn the governors into some kind of emperors who can do no wrong. No matter the amount of money thrown at judges, it will not make the desired impact if they are not free to decide cases in line with the prevailing law and their conscience. A rich man in chains is worse than a poor man who is free. We must all agree to allow our judicial officers the independence that they so richly deserve if justice is to bear its proper meaning. The seeming neglect of the judiciary by the other arms of government is rather unfortunate as in most cases, they need the courts more for them to function effectively. Just imagine the confusion that the Electoral Act 2022 has created already or even the issue of candidates participating in multiple primary elections. What about the case of public servants who want to actualize their political ambitions through the ballot? A nation with poorly paid judges is courting trouble for itself.

Be that as it may, my focus here is beyond salaries and allowances of judges as that is only an aspect of the issues plaguing the judicial sector. My humble appeal is for My Lords to take this lifeline as a challenge of some sort. We as citizens have agonized on behalf of the judiciary for so long on how to achieve effective administration of justice. How do we eliminate the delays, the frustrations and the disappointments that lawyers and litigants go through every day in the courts? The situation in the Lagos State High Court for instance has reached a dead end. New cases filed in these courts remain in the Registry for months unattended to. The e-filing system has become the albatross of the judiciary in Lagos State. Presently, to get a permanent suit number, you have to embrace some prayer and fasting. And while you’re at it, the mischief that was sought to be tackled through the case would have been consolidated by the adversary. What this means is that the court has gradually become a shield for wrongdoers, by default. When a system is subjected to such a grinding delay, then desperation will set in, by those who are eager to have their matters heard expeditiously. Corruption will surely follow such experience as court officials would readily cash in on the misfortune of litigants and lawyers to make brisk business. It is good that the Judiciary Committee of the Lagos Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association is already collaborating with the authorities of the judiciary in Lagos State to tackle this menace. Let other States take a cue to avoid this pitfall in the implementation of their e-filing systems.

Credit:BarristerNG

With the laudable decision by the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, to Charge Ms Adekunbi Ogunde, a partner in the law firm of Wole Olanipekun SAN, Chairman of the Body of Benchers, before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee LPDC, for professional misconduct arising from an email she sent to SAIPEM Contracting Nigeria Ltd on behalf of the firm, promising the company that their principal will use his position as Body of Benchers Chairman to influence Judges to give the company a favorable outcome in its case with Rivers State Government, the LPDC Should also recommend the immediate review notable cases won by the firm.

The Partner had in the email confessed that the firm had successfully influenced Judges in other cases and listed the beneficiary companies as MTN Nigeria, Equinor and Shell Petroleum.

With the confession of Ms Ogunde, the LPDC should immediately recommend an independent review of all notable cases recently handled by the firm of Wole Olanipekun SAN and Co, Particularly the ones referenced by Ms Ogunde to determine whether Justice was procured by influence of the Chairman of the BoB, using the influence of his office as confessed by his Partner.

The Law is trite on the authority of R v Sussex Justices ex parte McCarthy ([1924) 1 KB 256, [1923] All ER Rep 233) that Justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done in all cases and if this is not the case, then it is not justice.

The confessions of Ms Ogunde means only one thing, to wit, the Law Firm of the Body of Benchers Chairman depend solely on his undue influence on Judges and Judicial officers using his office to deliver the desired result for whichever party they appear for in a court case. A lawyer, while reading Ms Ogunde’s infamous email to Saipem, lamented that it simply means that while others lawyers are searching through the pages of laws and law books to find solutions to their clients problems, The law firm of Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN and Co are searching through the judicial contacts of the BoB Chairman to find a judicial officers to influence. This cannot to be justice and decisions reached through undue judicial influence should be reviewed.

Furthermore, Nigerian Justice system heavily depend on the doctrine of Stare Decisis in it’s dispensation of justice. This Doctrine makes all Judicial pronouncements and Decisions binding on lower courts and when the decision is by the supreme court, it is binding on all Nigerian Courts and litigants can rely on it to persuade courts to deliver judgements in his/her favor. What if these Judicial Decisions were procured by undue influence on Judges by the BoB Chairman?. The implications are grave.

This professional misconduct by the Law firm of the BoB Chairman has painted the Nigerian Legal justice system before the global community as a system where judgement is only obtained by undue Judicial influence. The LPDC should change this perception by recommending independent review of all the notable cases recently handled by the firm and particularly the ones Ms Ogunde confessed the firm got result using the influence of the Office of the Body of Benchers Chairman.

Credit:BarristerNG