The article by Mr. Muritala Abdul-Rasheed, SAN, Ph.D (Murray), calling for the resignation of the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, is a regrettable exercise in speculation presented as institutional concern. It is unfounded, misleading, and constructed largely on rumours, second-hand narratives, and assumptions that do not withstand even minimal scrutiny. One would reasonably expect greater circumspection from a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, particularly on issues capable of unsettling the polity of the Bar.
The central allegations in the article collapse almost immediately when tested against verifiable facts. The assertion that the NBA President described lawyers and judges as the “most corrupt” or “worst bribe takers” in Nigerian society is simply false. No such statement was made. At no forum did the President employ such language or convey such a sentiment.
What he addressed, in measured and contextual terms, was the broader challenge of systemic corruption and the collective responsibility of institutions in strengthening ethical standards. An accurate account of his remarks is already in the public domain and was reported by Vanguard. Any reader genuinely interested in the truth can consult the interview here:
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2026/02/nba-president-osigwe-didnt-brand-judges-lawyers-worst-bribe-takers/
It is therefore disturbing that a senior member of the Bar would disregard an authoritative public record and instead propagate a version of events that is demonstrably incorrect. That approach does a disservice not only to the President but to the profession itself.
Equally troubling is the confident commentary on the Maiduguri NEC meeting by someone who was not in attendance. Assertions are made about statements allegedly uttered, motives allegedly harboured, and conduct allegedly displayed, all without personal knowledge. That fact alone ought to have imposed a duty of restraint. Instead, conjecture was elevated to fact and deployed as the basis for a call for resignation.
The facts of the Maiduguri NEC meeting are now clearly on record. The Local Organising Committee has confirmed that all aspirants to national offices were given equal opportunity to display branded materials at the venue. No aspirant was accorded preferential treatment, and none was excluded. The official bottled water provided by the LOC bore no branding of any aspirant. Suggestions to the contrary are inaccurate and misleading.
More significantly, the posture of the NBA President at that meeting was the very opposite of partisanship. He cautioned against the growing monetisation of NBA politics, warned that it erodes the dignity and integrity of the Association, and called on the Electoral Committee of the NBA to enforce constitutional provisions against financial inducement firmly and without fear or favour. He further urged that aspirants should not be subjected to undue financial burdens in the process.
Far from endorsing any individual, he reaffirmed that while members of the National Executive Committee retain their personal right to vote, the Constitution expressly prohibits open endorsement of candidates by the leadership, a prohibition he undertook to respect. He described the leadership as fathers to all aspirants, not patrons of any.
It also bears restating that, as at today, there are no candidates for the office of NBA President or any other national office. Under the NBA Constitution, candidacy only arises upon formal declaration and submission of nomination documents to the Electoral Committee. Until then, there are no aspirants in the legal sense of the word. To build allegations of bias, institutional capture, or electoral manipulation around non-existent candidates is not only premature; it is embarrassing.
Mr. Abdul-Rasheed further asks, rather dismissively, what the NBA President has even achieved under his tenure. That question itself betrays either a lack of engagement with recent developments or a deliberate refusal to acknowledge them. Every Nigerian today can attest to the fact that the Nigerian Bar Association has found its voice in national affairs.
The Bar has been visible, audible, and principled in its interventions on matters of governance, rule of law, judicial independence, and constitutionalism. This did not happen by accident. It is the product of deliberate, relentless advocacy by the NBA President and a conscious commitment to ensuring that the Bar lives up to its historic responsibility as the conscience of the nation.
Beyond advocacy, the current efforts to amend the Legal Practitioners Act represent a landmark moment in the history of the profession. For the first time, a serious and coordinated attempt is being made to reform the principal legislation governing legal practice in Nigeria.
This initiative is a combined effort of the NBA under the leadership of Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, working collaboratively with the Office of the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and the Body of Benchers. That such an amendment process is underway at all is itself historic. To ignore this development while questioning the President’s achievements is either disingenuous or willfully blind.
What is most unfortunate about the article is the precedent it seeks to set. When a Senior Advocate of Nigeria speaks authoritatively on matters he neither witnessed nor verified, the harm goes beyond the immediate subject of his criticism. It fuels needless division, poisons the atmosphere of the Association, and weakens confidence in its institutions. The NBA thrives on robust debate, but such debate must be anchored on facts, evidence, and fairness, not on hearsay, conjecture, or personal disaffection.
One is therefore compelled to ask: if there is more to Mr. Abdul-Rasheed’s intervention than the interest and growth of the Nigerian Bar Association, it ought to be stated openly. Otherwise, he should resist allowing himself to be deployed, wittingly or unwittingly, as a tool to repeatedly hit and destabilise the polity of the Association. Seniority at the Bar carries with it a responsibility to stabilise, not inflame; to clarify, not confuse.
The call for the resignation of the NBA President, as articulated in the article, has no factual foundation. It is not a principled intervention; it is an overreach. Criticism grounded in truth strengthens institutions. Persistent resort to misinformation and speculative hostility weakens them. The Nigerian Bar Association deserves better from its senior voices.
Read More:
Open Letter to Mr. Adetunji Oso, SAN “Those Who Live in Glass Houses Should Not Throw Stones”
