LEST WE PUSH OURSELVES TO EXTINCTION – A REJOINDER TO ASIWAJU AWOMOLO’S NBA: HER FUTURE -A. O Olugbemi, Esq.

“Caring for myself is not self-indulgence, it is self-preservation, and that is an act of political warfare” – Audre Lorde

“Self-preservation isn’t worth it if you can’t live with the self you’re preserving”– David Levithan

I have read, with utmost sadness, shock and irritation the letter of very revered learned silk, Asiwaju Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, to Chief JTO Okpoko, SAN. Ordinarily, a letter written by someone of Asiwaju’s standing in the legal profession ought to be one “juniors” will feel excited to read. It was, therefore, a rude shock to see that the letter, respectfully, does not live to the learned silk’s supposed standing and persona in the profession. At best, the intention behind the letter ought to be one expressed by (and with no disrespect intended) recent graduates of the law school, who may not fully understand the full spectrum of the legal profession.

This letter is ill-conceived and should be disregarded, thrown into the dustbin of legal history for many reasons:

1. Negates the express terms of the NBA Constitution: The Constitution of the Nigerian Bar Association, 2015 as amended, provides for the criteria for anyone to hold any elective post at the bar. For the position of the President, which the learned silk has referred to, the constitution in Section 8(3)(c) and (d) prescribes that an aspirant to the position of the President of the Bar shall prior to his nomination to contest, be a member of the National Executive Committee for not less than two years and shall be not less than fifteen years post call. These are two strong requirements that a “junior” member of the bar cannot have. It is, therefore, preposterous that the learned silk does not consider the requirements highly enough to make an aspirant a senior member of the bar if the person is not a silk. Need I remind the learned silk that one only needs to be ten years at the bar to apply for the silk and in these days of reform, many people are getting called into the inner bar just on the attainment of ten-twelve years at the bar.
2. Presupposes that the silk is the highest level of distinction of a legal practitioner- Assuming without conceding that the learned silk is interested in the finest members of the legal profession leading the bar, the learned silk’s argument is grossly flawed on his assumption that the silk represents the highest distinction of the profession. This is because the silk represents a mark of distinction for courtroom advocates and not solicitors, hence, polarising the profession. This is a dangerous trend and more particularly, alarming coming from someone of Asiwaju’s standing. While the legal profession may have been litigation-centric in the 80’s-90’s when Asiwaju was in his prime, the legal profession in Nigeria has now moved beyond a sole focus on litigation and now recognises the very effective role of in-house counsel, commercial solicitors, and the likes. Therefore, Asiwaju’s recommendation may have worked in 1980 but it is certainly retrogressive in 2020. I should, perhaps, add that the next president of the bar should seriously consider the introduction of a title similar to that of the SAN for commercial solicitors, so that this over hyped pride and condescending projection on solicitors will be put to bed, once and for all.
3. Discriminatory against young lawyers: The learned silk’s letter also confirms to its readers, the discrimination against young lawyers by some very senior members of the bar. Going by the wordings of the letter, one could really project into the mind of the learned silk that given the chance, the silk would prefer that the NBA remains in the days of the delegate voting system as against the universal suffrage where, for instance, this writer will conveniently vote from his apartment in far away United Kingdom. The learned silk appears to be desperately fighting for the “establishment” and seems to present to the very distinguished JTO Okpoko, SAN that all must be done to keep the “establishment” going. This is the problem of the bar. In this election, we have heard from different quarters, particularly firms headed by other learned silks with the mindset of our distinguished Asiwaju that their lawyers must support and invariably vote only candidates approved by them, and of course fellow silks. As Franz Fannon once said “tell no lies, claim no easy victories, tell the people the way it is”, the true situation of the bar is that young lawyers are continuously discriminated against and the learned silk has just confirmed that.
4. An indirect and uncharitable attack on other silks who are supporting non-silks: The learned Asiwaju’s letter also indirectly attacks other learned silks who have thrown their full support to candidates other than a silk in this election. May I also remind that the only cleared candidate who is not a silk in the July 2020 elections is Olumide Akpata. Thus, the learned silk has attacked many silks and indirectly accused them of betrayal for not agreeing to the silk’s primordial disposition. This act by the learned silk is in itself uncharitable.
5. An indirect attack on Olumide Akpata: The learned silk’s letter smells on all fore with an indirect attack on Olumide Akpata, hidden under the guise of concern for the profession. One would think that the learned silk, having faced and survived the brutal military regime in Nigeria, will openly express his non-interest in a vibrant, progressive and ready to serve Olumide than hiding behind the cloak of preservation of the prestige of the silk to express his displeasure. Perhaps, this sort of positioning is what we also need to avoid at the highest positioning of the profession, where members (particularly senior members) are no longer bold to openly state their prejudices without hiding it on retrogressive ideas.

It is understandable if the learned silk is very conscious of the preservation of the prestige of the very noble rank of the inner bar. Just like the words of Audrey Lorde, caring for oneself may not be an act of self-indulgence, it may be an act of political warfare but as David Levithan wrote, such self-preservation is not worth it when you cannot live with the self you are trying to preserve. If the learned silk wants to preserve the rank of the silk, by all means, preserve it by making the silks pay adequate remuneration and having good welfare packages for the juniors in their chambers, let them remain people of impeccable character and dignity and not being docked by the EFCC, let them provide good, charitable, time-relevant advice to members of the profession. That self-preservation will not come when you polarise the profession into a “barrister” only profession, for the solicitors and those who have been “forgotten” in the profession may fight back and that may mark the beginning of the death of the NBA.

Lest we push ourselves to extinction, let us unite, let us not divide. The bar must work for all.

Akinbobola Olukayode Olugbemi writes from Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom