By Asiwaju Kunle Kalejaye, SAN
Chairman, Eagle102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu
The inaugural address of Mrs. Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, titled “From the Call to the Cause,” marks a significant moment for the Nigerian legal community as she assumes office as the 33rd President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA).
Sworn in by her predecessor, Afam Osigwe, SAN, at the High Court Complex in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Badejo-Okusanya’s emergence represents a historic milestone as the first woman elected President of the NBA through a competitive national ballot, although the election itself was not without controversy.
Beyond the circumstances surrounding her emergence, however, her inaugural address offers an opportunity to examine a more fundamental question: Can the new administration unite a Bar that has become increasingly divided along factional, generational, economic and geographical lines?
Her vision of a “bolder Bar” confronts some of the most pressing challenges facing the profession, including internal divisions, professional disconnects and the economic vulnerabilities of younger lawyers.
At the heart of her message is an important truth: an association entrusted with defending judicial independence, upholding the rule of law and speaking truth to power cannot effectively discharge its national responsibilities if it remains internally fragmented.
By focusing on the professional survival of young lawyers and promising decisive action against misconduct, the new President has highlighted an urgent reality: institutional strength requires collective solidarity, purposeful leadership and institutional determination.
For the NBA to achieve lasting unity, however, the administration must move beyond rhetoric and embrace deliberate structural reforms capable of building bridges across factions, classes, generations and geographical divides.
The Abraham Lincoln Strategy
One of the immediate priorities of the new administration should be the institutionalisation of post-election reconciliation.
The leadership must deliberately distance itself from divisive rhetoric and provocative narratives. Competitive elections often leave behind bitter factions, and if these divisions are not addressed, they can undermine cooperation and frustrate progressive policies.
The administration could therefore establish an “Olive Branch Initiative” that brings leading members of rival campaigns and other stakeholders into strategic national committees and policy platforms.
The objective should be simple: turn former political rivals into co-creators of the future of the Bar.
Indeed, this is what I would describe as the Abraham Lincoln strategy.
Following his victory in the 1860 United States presidential election, Abraham Lincoln appointed some of his former Republican rivals to key positions in his administration. His overriding consideration was the enormous crisis confronting the United States. He recognised that the country needed its most capable and influential leaders, regardless of their previous political rivalry.
Lincoln understood that robust debate could strengthen governance rather than weaken it.
The NBA can learn from that example.
The new administration should be broad enough to accommodate competing perspectives, provided such participation is guided by professionalism, competence and a commitment to the collective interest of the Bar.
Bridging the Generational and Economic Divide
Unity must also address the widening economic and generational gap between senior practitioners and younger lawyers.
The NBA should consider advocating and enforcing standardised minimum remuneration and welfare requirements across its branches, particularly for young lawyers who often begin their careers under difficult economic circumstances.
The association could also establish joint mentorship hubs where senior practitioners work with younger, technology-oriented lawyers on emerging areas of legal practice, including artificial intelligence, data privacy, fintech and digital commerce.
Such initiatives would transform the generational divide from a source of tension into an opportunity for mutual professional empowerment.
Senior lawyers have experience and institutional knowledge. Younger lawyers bring technological competence, new ideas and an understanding of emerging areas of practice.
The Bar needs both.
The NBA and Digital Professional Ethics
True unity also requires restoring civility and professional responsibility in digital spaces.
The legal profession has lost considerable ground because of the increasingly aggressive digital posture of some of its members. Social media disagreements sometimes degenerate into personal attacks, cyberbullying and public professional disputes.
The NBA should therefore consider developing a comprehensive Digital Ethics and Professional Conduct Framework to complement existing professional rules.
International experience provides useful lessons.
The American Bar Association, through its Ethics 20/20 initiative, examined the implications of technology and evolving legal practice for professional conduct, including issues relating to confidentiality, communication and lawyers’ responsibilities in the digital environment.
The NBA can similarly develop clear guidance on online conduct, confidentiality, misleading statements, cyberbullying and behaviour capable of damaging public confidence in the legal profession.
Regional Ethics and Disciplinary Committees could be equipped with secure mechanisms for receiving and reviewing complaints involving alleged digital misconduct.
Where violations are established, proportionate sanctions should apply.
Such a framework should also be complemented by mandatory continuing legal education programmes on digital ethics, online professionalism and emerging technologies.
The goal should not be to suppress legitimate disagreement. Rather, it should be to ensure that disagreement among lawyers remains professional, responsible and consistent with the dignity of the profession.
Breaking the Lagos-Abuja Perception
The NBA must also confront the persistent perception that it is a “Lagos-Abuja-centric” organisation.
Whether this perception is entirely accurate or not, it exists, and institutions must address perceptions that affect members’ sense of belonging.
One practical solution is to decentralise national activities.
National Executive Council meetings and other major NBA programmes should be rotated across Nigeria’s geopolitical zones. Smaller and rural branches should receive greater institutional, financial and technical support.
Every lawyer, regardless of location, should feel that the NBA belongs to him or her.
The strength of a national professional association is ultimately measured by how effectively it accommodates its members across geographical and professional boundaries.
Bringing the Silent Majority Back
The new administration must also deliberately work towards bringing many disillusioned and inactive members back into the fold.
The opaque electoral processes that have dogged the association in recent years have, understandably, affected the morale of a significant number of otherwise silent members.
Chief Yomi Alliyu, SAN, captured this concern in an opinion piece when he argued that the NBA had been “hijacked by political lawyers” and alleged that the adoption of electronic voting had been manipulated to favour a particular class of members.
Whether one agrees entirely with that assessment or not, such perceptions cannot simply be dismissed.
They point to a deeper crisis of confidence.
The new administration must therefore pursue credible reconciliation, transparency and institutional reforms capable of restoring trust in the association’s electoral and governance processes.
The silent class struggle within the NBA must end if the association is to realise its full potential.
The Road to Kigali
I was sorely tempted to headline this piece: “Nigerian Bar Association: The Road to Kigali.”
I refrained because I still see a silver lining that this new administration can seize to save the NBA from itself.
The “road to Kigali” is, in this context, a grim metaphor for the dangers of institutional fracture, polarisation and eventual irrelevance.
If proactive steps are not taken to unite and reform the organisation, the NBA risks becoming increasingly fractured along ethnic, regional, factional and generational lines.
That would weaken its ability to speak with one authoritative voice on matters concerning justice, democracy, constitutionalism and the rule of law.
The history of the NBA contains its own warnings.
The 1992 Port Harcourt Conference Crisis remains a significant reminder of how internal divisions can bring a professional institution to the brink of destruction.
Today, unless we choose to play the ostrich, the warning signs of conflict are already visible.
The present leadership, however, has a unique opportunity to write its name in gold by consciously, deliberately and clinically steering the NBA away from self-implosion.
Its task is clearly cut out.
It must reconcile the factions, restore confidence in the institution, bridge generational and economic divides, strengthen professional ethics and make every member feel that the Nigerian Bar Association belongs to them.
The NBA must move beyond the ballot. The real test of the new administration will be whether it can build a Bar that works for all.
Failure to seize this moment could place the association on the road to Kigali.
Success, on the other hand, could usher in a stronger, more united and more respected Nigerian Bar.
