The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has dismissed alleged attempts by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, to influence its forthcoming national officers’ election, insisting that the exercise will proceed as scheduled under its constitution.
The association maintained that only its constitutional organs, particularly the National Executive Council (NEC), have the authority to postpone or alter the electoral process, stressing that it remains an independent professional body beyond the control of the Office of the Attorney-General.
The position was contained in a statement issued on Tuesday by NBA President, Afam Osigwe, following reports of a document purportedly containing recommendations endorsed by the Attorney-General regarding the association’s election.
The 2026 NBA National Officers’ Election has already been rescheduled from Monday, July 20, to Saturday, July 18, while the declaration of results is expected on Sunday, July 19.
According to the NBA, the controversial document recommended the dissolution of the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA), postponement of the election, disengagement of the association’s election service provider, appointment of a caretaker committee to organise a fresh poll, introduction of National Identification Number (NIN) verification for voters and amendments to the NBA Constitution to abolish universal suffrage.
The association described the alleged directives as unconstitutional, arguing that the Attorney-General lacks the legal powers to interfere in its internal affairs.
“The Nigerian Bar Association is an independent body not under the control of the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation,” the statement said, adding that the limited powers granted to the AGF under the Legal Practitioners Act do not extend to the management of the association’s internal electoral process.
The NBA also questioned the authenticity of the purported report, noting that it was neither issued on the official letterhead of the Attorney-General’s office nor formally communicated to the association.
It further observed that the recommendations closely resemble reliefs being sought in pending suits filed by Egbe Amofin before the High Court of Oyo State.
According to the association, since the Attorney-General has participated in meetings relating to the dispute both as a litigant and mediator, he cannot lawfully impose decisions on matters already before the courts.
The NBA also criticised the sub-committee that reportedly produced the recommendations, insisting that it exceeded its mandate.
It said a meeting convened by the Attorney-General on June 11, 2026, only authorised the committee to facilitate discussions aimed at securing the withdrawal of pending lawsuits and not to investigate or make findings against the NBA leadership.
The association accused the committee of breaching the principles of fair hearing by making adverse findings against Osigwe without affording him an opportunity to respond to allegations made in memoranda submitted by some presidential candidates.
It also questioned the neutrality of the committee’s chairman, Wole Olanipekun, alleging that his relationship with parties in the ongoing litigation created the appearance of bias.
Reaffirming its position, the NBA said the electoral process would continue strictly in accordance with the timetable released by the ECNBA, adding that any proposals arising from mediation efforts could only become binding if accepted by all parties.
The association also defended its decision not to introduce NIN verification into the current election, explaining that a risk assessment showed the National Identity Management Commission’s verification platform might be unable to handle the anticipated volume of requests during voting, potentially disrupting the exercise.
It similarly rejected calls to replace its electronic voting service provider because it operates as a sole proprietorship, describing such arguments as discriminatory and inconsistent with legal practice, where many law firms also operate as sole proprietorships.
“The Nigerian Bar Association is a body that has clear decision-making organs and can only subject itself to its constitutional mechanisms,” the association stated, adding that no wrongdoing had been established against the ECNBA since its inauguration.
Meanwhile, former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Chidi Odinkalu, accused the Attorney-General of attempting to use his office to influence the outcome of the NBA leadership election.
Writing on X, Odinkalu alleged that there had been plans to deploy the powers of the Attorney-General’s office to take control of the association if certain interests failed to prevail through the electoral process.
He argued that because the Attorney-General is a party in ongoing litigation concerning the NBA election before the Court of Appeal, he lacks the legal authority to issue binding directives on issues already before the courts.
“If a party to a pending case is proposing terms of settlement, those cannot be directions. At best, they are proposals for the parties to consider,” Odinkalu stated.
He also faulted the reported proposal to make NIN verification compulsory for voting, noting that the NBA does not maintain the official Roll of Legal Practitioners, which is the responsibility of the Supreme Court.
Odinkalu further rejected the suggestion that the Attorney-General could appoint a caretaker committee or sole administrator for the NBA, insisting that the association is a non-governmental organisation governed by its incorporated trustees.
“The military tried and failed to take over the NBA or to turn it into their plaything. This lot, too, shall fail. The NBA is not a department of the Federal Ministry of Justice,” he said.
In a related development, the ECNBA has published the branch-by-branch provisional voters’ register for the 2026 national officers’ election and invited members to scrutinise the list before the final register is released.
The committee said sensitive information, including email addresses, telephone numbers and Supreme Court enrolment numbers, had been withheld from the published register to protect members’ privacy and preserve the integrity of the electoral process.
It also disclosed that 671 legal practitioners who paid their practising fees before the deadline but were not affiliated with any NBA branch had been listed separately, reminding them that branch membership is a constitutional requirement for voting eligibility.
According to the ECNBA, the publication forms part of efforts to ensure a transparent, credible and inclusive election, while the revised timetable supersedes all previous schedules.