NBA Calls For Restraint After Removal Of Section 84 (12) Of The Electoral Act
The Nigerian Bar Association has officially reacted to the judgement of a Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia nullifying the highly debated Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act, 2022 and instructing the Attorney General of the Federation to delete the said section as being illegal.
In a statement by the Association President, Mr. Olumide Akpata on Monday, 21st of March, 2022 he urged Nigerians in general and lawyers to exercise restriant and decorum in commenting on the judgment of the Courts.
Akpata also promised that the Association will study the judgment of Hon. justice Evelyn Anyadike and take appropriate steps.
The statement reads in Part; “The NBA wishes to call on Nigerians and especially legal practitioners, to refrain from employing intemperate language to characterise Judgements and/or Judges of our Courts. The Rules of Professional Conduct and the ethics that regulate our profession enjoin us to treat our Courts and Judges with utmost respect. We must reiterate that are legal and constitutional avenues to challenge unfavourable judgements and lawyers and indeed the generality of Nigerians are therefore enjoined to explore these avenues rather than resorting to unwarranted and counterproductive attacks on Judges and the Judiciary.”
He noted; “Nonetheless, the NBA must emphatically state that all Courts in Nigeria must act in accordance with the dictates of the law and having regard to justice in order to forestall a situation of breakdown of law and order which is certain to occur when the generality of Nigerians ultimately lose confidence in the court system”.
“Nonetheless, the NBA must emphatically state that all Courts in Nigeria must act in accordance with the dictates of the law and having regard to justice in order to forestall a situation of breakdown of law and order which is certain to occur when the generality of Nigerians ultimately lose confidence in the court system”.
According to the statement, the NBA has noted some of complaints about the judgement and its consequences with respect to the controversial S.84(12) of the amended Electoral Act, 2022. He also noted the blistering speed with which the case was concluded stating that justice rushed is justice crushed and the judiciary must establish a balance between speedy dispensation of justice and allowing time for thoroughly conduct trials.
“While it is truism that justice delayed is justice denied, and that we have long complained about the delays that ordinary litigants face in the determination of their rights and obligations before our courts, it is also correct that justice rushed is justice crushed, especially in a public interest case such as the case in issue. The utopian balance between these twin constraints continues to occupy the attention of stakeholders in the administration of justice.”
