By our Reporter
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has dismissed reports alleging that the Attorney General of the Federation directed the postponement of its 2026 National Officers’ Election, insisting that only its National Executive Council (NEC) has the constitutional authority to make such a decision.
In a statement signed by the NBA President, Afam Osigwe, the association described as unconstitutional and ultra vires a purported report attributed to a sub-committee and comments allegedly made by the Attorney General of the Federation.
The report reportedly recommended the disbandment of the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA), the postponement of the election, the appointment of a new election service provider, the establishment of a caretaker committee, the incorporation of National Identification Number (NIN) verification into the voting process and amendments to the NBA Constitution.
Rejecting the recommendations, the NBA maintained that it is an independent body not subject to the control or directives of the Attorney General of the Federation or any arm of government.
According to the association, the office of the Attorney General lacks the constitutional and statutory powers to interfere in its internal affairs or halt its democratic processes.
“The Nigerian Bar Association is an independent body not subject to the control and directive of the office of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation or any other arm of government,” the statement read.
The association argued that under Section 10(2) of the Legal Practitioners Act, no circumstances exist that would permit the Attorney General to intervene in its affairs in the manner suggested.
The NBA also questioned the authenticity of the purported report, noting that it was not issued on the official letterhead of the Attorney General’s office and that the association had not received any formal communication from the office.
It further clarified that the meeting convened by the Attorney General on June 11, 2026, was intended solely to facilitate an amicable resolution of legal disputes arising from the Egbe Amofin cases pending before the High Court of Oyo State and the subsequent appeal.
According to the NBA, the sub-committee established at the meeting was mandated only to liaise with the parties involved to facilitate the withdrawal of the suits and was never authorised to investigate or make findings against the NBA President or recommend changes to the association’s electoral process.
The association also criticised the composition of the sub-committee, alleging bias on the part of its chairman, Wole Olanipekun, whom it said had publicly aligned with one side of the dispute.
The NBA maintained that the Electoral Committee had committed no wrongdoing since its inauguration and affirmed that preparations for the national officers’ election would continue as scheduled.
On the proposal to integrate National Identification Number (NIN) verification into the election, the association disclosed that it had previously conducted a risk assessment and concluded that modifying the existing electronic voting platform at this stage could disrupt the election because of possible limitations in the National Identity Management Commission’s authentication system.
The association also defended its current election technology provider against suggestions that the contract should be terminated because the firm is a sole proprietorship, describing such a position as discriminatory and inconsistent with legal practice, where many law firms also operate as sole proprietorships.
Reaffirming its commitment to due process and constitutional governance, the NBA stressed that its electoral process would continue under the supervision of the ECNBA and that any decision affecting the election could only be taken through its constitutionally recognised organs.
