By CARL UMEGBORO

Copyright independent

Last year, 2024, the Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Asso-ciation held in Lagos. It was marred by a controversy over the appointment of a new wig, Deji Adeyanju, who was then barely six months post-call in the bar, into a sensitive committee. The un-precedented development stirred up a serious controversy. The majority frowned at the development, though in silence, except for a few who spoke out. The explanations given by the newly inaugurated executive, then led by Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, were met with half-hearted acceptance. The Exco’s reason was to carry everyone along irrespective of the year of call. Well, the new president and his team started with much vigour and pros-pects. Hence, the opponents of the new style at one point gave up their reservations, as the deed had already been done.

Again, during the just-concluded 2025 AGC held in Enugu, the act gath-ered momentum. Two politicians, Dino Melaye and Osita Chidoka, who were called to the Bar barely two months before the confab, and Kanayo O. Kanayo, joined the list for the same recognitions. They were among the panelists. Whether they delivered is an issue for another day. The recurrence has again stirred up further anger and uproar. Due to my recent publication in virtually all print media and online platforms about the annual confer-ence, in which I had commended the NBA executive, albeit on a different issue, my reading fans, as well as the media, have been on my case for my take. I had also read the defence by the NBA-AGC Planning Committee, which emphasized inclusiveness.

Superficially, the idea appears fan-tastic and attractive. But on a holistic approach, it is not too good. It could be an oversight and should be further looked into. This explains that wide consultation before taking vital deci-sions while leading the public is im-perative. To start with, it is dangerous to start what one cannot finish. As the number has increased this year, expect more to lobby for it next year, as a by-pass to jump the precedence ladder that sustains the Bar. The Bar should not allow politicking tactics. The legal profession is guided by ethics. For that reason, it cannot metamorphose into a social organisation that measures the accomplishments of people outside legal practice.

Ideally, NBA panelists should be veteran lawyers such as eminent ju-rists, judges, learned silks, and legal experts with outstanding records, not by mere years of call. It’s not a show-off thing. Anything outside this is tantamount to enthroning mediocri-ty at the expense of merit. In Nigeria, anyone can become a minister. It only requires a political affiliation. Also, ev-eryone is an actor and a human rights activist. What differs is the size of the space. Nobody has been accused of im-personating a politician, human rights activist, or actor. So, the Bar cannot transform into political institutions that are controlled by the volume of one’s currency and brands of lambo-rghinis, ferraris, bugattis, et cetera, one has in their convoy.

For instance, in the olden days, new lawyers had to undergo a pupillage of five years as a prerequisite to practice law, which served as a probation. And this policy made lawyers appear re-fined, unlike what is obtained today. Back then, a lawyer must be articulate in speech and writing, well-organised, moderate, and responsible. Today, these values are speedily being eroded. To ask mildly, what will the new wigs that should be undergoing pupillage under veteran lawyers be impacting their audience on the podium? The confab is for eruditions from legal ex-perts. Being a sound lawyer requires many years of experience and dedica-tion. There’s no shortcut to it.

The society is collapsing due to the shortcut system, where the traditional institutions recklessly accord recog-nition to every Dick and Harry with fat envelopes. The danger in the idea, if not properly looked into, is that ‘ya-hoo-yahoo’ boys may soon hijack the Bar. It is imperative to learn a lesson against celebrating wealth without knowing the sources. A famous pro-prietor of a private university in Osun State was convicted of murder in 2023 and sentenced to death by hanging over ritual killings. Before the fate-ful incident, he was celebrated as a rich philanthropist. The man built a state-of-the-art university and other schools, including a polytechnic, and a three-star hotel, all as a cover-up for heinous undertakings. Perhaps, if he had studied Law and been called to the Bar before his arrest, conviction, and sentence, he could have also mounted the podium as a panelist immediately after call to the Bar by virtue of his sta-tus. So, caution is necessary. All that glitters, they say, is not gold.

The summit should be for serious business where participants will leave refreshed and invigorated with new in-sights, concepts, and perceptions. And this is only feasible by putting square pegs in square holes. Emphatically, a lawyer who is less than 10 years post-call and without an outstanding im-pact in legal practice has no business in the panel sessions or key roles, let alone new wigs. Growth in profes-sions, particularly in legal practice, follows stages just as natural phe-nomena. A child born today cannot become a man overnight. Apart from sessions to discuss related topics like “the challenges at the law school” or “the plight of new wigs in practice”, for an appraisal of the system, new wigs would not resourcefully make panelists. For other sessions, there are more than sufficient veteran and senior lawyers to mount the podium. For young lawyers who are obvious-ly beginners to mount the podium to discuss issues affecting the legal profession in the presence of veteran lawyers, it must be uproarious.

To sum up, there are better ways to inspire young lawyers and sustain both the precedent and the precedence in the Bar. Ensuring their participa-tion in the confab is affordable is one. To engage new wigs as panelists or any roles that require professional experi-ence is akin to putting a crewman to coach pilots on how to fly aeroplanes. There is therefore no justifiable rea-son for gurus to take the back seats for embryonic brains in legal practice, to lead. That is a non-sequitur. NBA-AGC is a professional summit, and not a po-litical convention that places value on who can lobby their way to the top. Pre-cedence and proficiency are the core pillars of the legal profession.

*Umegboro, ACIArb, is a legal practitioner, social policy and public affairs analyst (08023184542, 08173184542; umegborocarl@ gmail.com)