By Lillian Okenwa
Reactions have continued to trail the letter written by the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, (NBA), Mr. Olumide Akpata which requested Chief Wole Olanipekun, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), to recuse himself from office as chairman of the Body of Benchers (BoB).
But as the legal community was still digesting the hell-raising letter occasioned by allegations of professional misconduct by Ms. Adekunbi Ogunde, a Partner in the Law Firm of Wole Olanipekun & Co, a rather intriguing WhatsApp post was credited to another Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Yomi Alliyu. The post reads: “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!”
Akpata in the now controversial letter asked Olanipekun to recuse himself from the Chairing the BoB on the grounds that the Chairman shared a working relationship with the Lawyer before the LPDC, and as Chairman of the Body supervising the LPDC, a conflict of interest was likely to arise.
In a Facebook post, Prof. Ernest Ojukwu, SAN noted that “NBA President Akpata’s advise to Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN pertains to questions of professional misconduct, ethics, and professional responsibility,” while expressing displeasure over the comments of Yomi Alliyu, SAN.
“The comment attributed to Yemi Aliyu, SAN that attempts to divert the issues to mundane tribal discussions is terribly disappointing and unfortunate. If those statements were truly made, then we have a dangerous precedent in the profession, especially coming from a Senior SAN. Such a statement from a Senior Advocate of Nigeria engages in conduct which is unbecoming of a legal practitioner and deserves disciplinary action.”
Yomi Alliyu is the Lawyer to popular Yoruba land agitator, Sunday Igboho.
J.S. Okutepa, SAN, one of the longest-serving prosecutors at the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) described the comments as unfortunate.
“I really don’t think it is fair to rake up Kunle Kelajaye SAN prosecution before LPDC as an ethics agenda. That will be the most unfortunate thing to do coming as it were from a Senior Advocate of Nigeria. The petition that led to the prosecution of Mr. Kelajaye was not initiated outside Yoruba land. I prosecuted that complaint after due investigations and a prima facie case of professional misconduct was made. I have no regrets about that prosecution. If we are not careful we the leaders of the Bar will completely ruin this profession. I have no comment on the decision of the NBA under the subject of discussion. But to bring the case of Kunle Kelajaye SAN as persecution of Yoruba lawyers is with due respect a statement not to be made concerning the prosecution of Kunle Kelajaye SAN. The allegations against Kunle Kelajaye were not found to have been baseless. His appeal at the Supreme Court was allowed on the technical points of quorum of LPDC and not that the allegations of professional misconduct were not proved. We must avoid comments that are inciting and befitting our status as senior lawyers.
“In addition let it be known that the allegations against Mr. Kunle Kelajaye was that he was communicating with judges of the Election Petitions Tribunal. The judges involved Justice Naron was tried found culpable and removed from office as a judicial officer. He was dismissed. The petition against Kunle Kalejaye was duly investigated by a panel headed by an eminent legal practitioner of great repute Mrs. Funke Adekoya SAN, a legal icon and an Amazon of extraordinary integrity. The judge that was removed by NJC. We must avoid anything that will make us a laughing stock in the comity of respected legal practitioners. What is bad is bad. No ethics colouration can make it right. I say no more. When you read the Rules of Professional Conduct in the legal profession you will appreciate that as lawyers we are supposed to be the light of the society. Light and dark tolerate not one another. They cannot cohabit.”
Also weighing in on the matter, a Law Professor and a former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) said: “There is now a tyranny of a provincial, artisanal mindset that treats SAN as a nativity rite, not in any way different from a Chieftaincy title…”
Then in response to Ebuka Nwaeze, an Abuja lawyer who remarked— “The SAN should as well face disciplinary proceedings for this comment. By this, he is suggesting that Kalejaiye SAN was improperly and unjustly found wanting and treated outside the requirements of the law; and Ogunbi is being unjustly called to account. A lawyer, not to talk of a Senior Advocate, ought not to speak like that, except he has a factual basis. He needs a forum and a day before the LPDC or LPPC to explain what he meant or face the hammer. Mr. President @Olu Akpata, kindly direct that appropriate steps be taken, sir. Senior advocacy is an emblem of excellence and this comment makes a mess of the expectation from a holder of that rank,” Odinkalu further stated:
“That will be an own goal, in my respectful view. Among its functions, free expression enables idiots to reveal themselves in the full majesty of their nakedness. It is no use thereafter trying them for professional misconduct. First, by doing that, you ennoble them in ways they are unfit for. Second, you distract attention from their self-inflicted nakedness. Third, you could even elevate them to martyrdom. There is nothing that says or guarantees that the exercise of free expression will mean we hear only what we like. But, look, if this guy did not say this stuff, would you have known what kind of creature masquerades under cover of Silk? I will continue to defend the right of this particular SAW (Senior Advocate of Whatever) to make a fool of himself. Let’s glorify free expression, please! As we say in my village: Eku Yomi Aliyu oh !”
Recall that the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, (ACJN), Hon. Justice Olukayode Ariwoola had said the challenges of the legal profession were self-inflicted and that the NBA had a burden to ensure legal practitioners kept to the ethics of the profession. He was the keynote speaker at the NBA Section on Legal Practice (SLP) 2022 Annual Conference in Asaba, Delta State, with the theme: “Legal Practice in Nigeria: Our Reality, Our Future.”
In the petition marked BB/LPDC/901/2022, and sent to the LPDC on July 20, 2022, John Aikpokpo-Martins, first vice-president of the NBA, said the issue “brought unprecedented shame, ridicule, opprobrium and odium to the entire justice system and the legal profession in Nigeria.” As a result, the NBA prayed “the committee to immediately commence the disciplinary process and prosecute ADEKUNBI OGUNDE Esq. for the violation of the sacred provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct, particularly Rule 1 thereof…”
In the meantime, Nigerian Law School lecturer, Sylvester Udemezue has said a fair-minded investigation into the matter is in the interest of Chief Olanipekun SAN. Reacting to a statement by Aik Malik, SAN who said the President is merely playing to the gallery, Udemezue said: “Dear Learned silk sir, I think (with respect) many grounds exist upon which this your comment could be faulted. The issues at stake go far beyond how simple you try unsuccessfully to make it look like. Besides, sir, I think a fair-minded investigation into this matter is in the very best interest of my respected oga, Chief Olanipekun SAN, considering that all facts are already in the public domain, and the scenario has created too many wrong impressions about him, which need to be cleared through an independent investigation, geared towards restoring the public confidence in his status as an icon and a leading light for upcoming generations of lawyers in Nigeria…
“Dear learned silk sir, LPDC may not (as you suggested) be directly controlled by the BOB. But do you agree that LPDC Members are appointed by the BOB? Do you agree also that the LPDC is an arm of the BOB? What do you say about the reasons cited by Mr. Ukala, SAN, for resigning his membership of the LPDC? Does Mr. Ukala’s letter/actions not raise reasonable suspicion that the BOB (especially the BOB Chairman) has the capacity to influence the LPDC? What does this say about Nemo judex, especially in this instance where the BOB Chairman himself is in the eye of the storm? What does this say about the application of the rules relating to the likelihood of bias in this case? Nemo Judex in Causa Sua!”
