“NBA Election Must Proceed, Every Fee-Paying Lawyer Must Have A Vote” — Odinkalu Rejects Regional Forum Control

Professor Chidi Odinkalu, a prominent legal scholar and former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, has strongly advocated for the immediate progression of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) elections, emphasizing that every fee-paying lawyer must be accorded the right to vote. Odinkalu vehemently rejects any attempts at regional forum control over the electoral process, warning that such interference undermines the principles of universal suffrage and democratic integrity within the association. His stance highlights ongoing concerns about potential election rigging and the broader implications for judicial independence and the rule of law in Nigeria, urging the NBA to uphold transparency and fairness in its leadership selection.

The integrity of professional bodies is paramount to their credibility and effectiveness, a principle currently at the forefront of discussions within Nigeria's legal community regarding the upcoming Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) elections. Professor Chidi Odinkalu, a respected legal scholar and former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, has issued a compelling call for the NBA elections to proceed without undue delay, asserting that every fee-paying lawyer must exercise their fundamental right to vote. This declaration comes amidst heightened concerns over electoral transparency and the potential for manipulation within the association's leadership selection process.

Odinkalu's intervention is particularly significant as it directly challenges the influence of regional forums in determining the NBA's leadership, a practice he argues is antithetical to the democratic ideals of universal suffrage. His warnings extend beyond the immediate electoral contest, touching upon broader anxieties about election rigging, judicial capture, and even alleged political plots, underscoring the critical importance of a free and fair electoral process for the legal profession. This article delves into the statutory and doctrinal underpinnings of NBA elections, analyzes the implications of Odinkalu's rejection of regional control, and considers the broader ramifications for legal practitioners and the rule of law in Nigeria.

The Nigerian Bar Association, as the umbrella professional body for all lawyers in Nigeria, operates under a constitution that governs its structure, functions, and the election of its national officers. Historically, the NBA's electoral system has undergone significant evolution. At the turn of the millennium, the association transitioned from universal suffrage to a delegate-based system in an effort to mitigate electoral disputes. However, in a pivotal reform in 2015, the NBA reverted to universal suffrage, reinstating the 'one lawyer, one vote' principle for the election of its national officers. This change is enshrined in the NBA Constitution 2015 (as amended in 2025), specifically Article 9(4), which mandates that "Election into National Offices shall be by universal suffrage and electronic voting as set out in Second Schedule."

Further complicating the electoral landscape is the constitutional provision for zoning, which dictates that the positions of President, three Vice-Presidents, and General Secretary rotate among three designated geographical zones: Northern, Eastern, and Western. For the 2026 elections, the presidency is zoned to the Western Region, with candidates emerging from this area. The Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA) is the independent body established under the NBA Constitution to organize and supervise these national elections, including screening aspirants, publishing the voters' register, overseeing voter verification, and managing the electronic voting platform. Eligibility to vote requires a valid Supreme Court Number (SCN), completed voter verification, updated contact information, and the timely payment of all constitutional dues, including the Bar Practicing Fees.

Professor Chidi Odinkalu's rejection of regional forum control over NBA elections directly challenges practices that he argues undermine the constitutional principle of universal suffrage. While the NBA Constitution explicitly provides for "one lawyer, one vote", regional bodies, such as the Eastern Bar Forum and the Egbe Amofin O'odua, have historically sought to endorse or impose candidates. Odinkalu points to past elections, including the 2018 and 2020 contests, where regional preferences were reportedly overridden by the wider electorate, demonstrating the potential for universal suffrage to counter such influence.

His current concerns center on allegations that the Egbe Amofin O'odua, representing the six South-West states, has endorsed a specific presidential candidate, Muyiwa Akinboro SAN, and has attempted to exclude other candidates from the contest. Odinkalu contends that such actions are unfair to lawyers not affiliated with these regional blocs and to the broader NBA membership, effectively seeking to revert to a system where a select few determine the leadership, rather than the collective will of all fee-paying lawyers. This alleged interference directly conflicts with the spirit of Article 9(4) of the NBA Constitution, which champions universal suffrage.

Furthermore, Odinkalu's warnings extend to the broader integrity of the electoral process, citing concerns about flawed voters' registers and the potential for manipulation. He has previously described NBA elections as "deeply flawed" and called for a root-and-branch internal inquiry into leadership elections. The ECNBA, for its part, has affirmed its commitment to conducting a free, fair, transparent, inclusive, and credible election, publishing timetables and guidelines, and inviting both international and domestic observers. Despite these assurances, the ongoing litigation and allegations of external interference, including attempts to postpone the election, highlight the persistent challenges in safeguarding the NBA's democratic process. The debate underscores a fundamental tension between established constitutional provisions for universal suffrage and persistent attempts by regional power blocs to exert control, raising questions about the true independence of the Bar.

Professor Chidi Odinkalu's resolute call for the NBA elections to proceed with universal suffrage, free from regional forum control, serves as a crucial reminder of the democratic principles that should underpin the leadership selection of Africa's largest professional body. For practising attorneys, the outcome of this debate and the integrity of the electoral process have profound implications for the representativeness and effectiveness of the NBA in advocating for their interests and upholding the rule of law. The continued assertion of the 'one lawyer, one vote' principle is vital to ensuring that the NBA remains a truly democratic institution, responsive to its entire membership.

Practitioners should remain vigilant and actively participate in the electoral process, leveraging their constitutional right to vote to safeguard the NBA's independence and democratic ethos. The legal community must hold the ECNBA and all stakeholders accountable to the provisions of the NBA Constitution, particularly Article 9(4) on universal suffrage, and resist any attempts to subvert the will of the majority through regional endorsements or other forms of undue influence. The future credibility of the NBA, both nationally and internationally, hinges on its ability to conduct elections that are demonstrably free, fair, and transparent, reflecting the collective voice of every fee-paying lawyer.