CROSSFIRE! NBA vs IBAS

Should NBA Refund the N300 Million Conference Gift? 

The Nigerian polity hasn’t had any quiet since the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, suspension of the Rivers State Governor and the Rivers State House of Assembly members by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR last month. The latest muddling of the already muddy waters came last week when the Rivers State Sole Administrator, Ibok-Ete Ibas, demanded that the N300 million earlier donated to the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) towards hosting this year’s Annual General Conference (AGC) in Port Harcourt be refunded to the coffers of Rivers State Government, consequent upon NBA relocating the AGC to Enugu. The umbrage and controversy this demand has elicited, is the subject of this edition, in a Cross Fire

The N300 million Should be Returned to Rivers State

OCJ Okocha, SAN

I do not agree with the decision to relocate the Annual Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association to Enugu.

We, as members of the Association, must learn to adapt to the circumstances that confront us at any given time, and also learn to deal with matters that arise from those circumstances.

The ostensible reason for the relocation of the Conference, is the current Emergency Rule in Rivers State. That, on its own, is ample reason for us to come to Port Harcourt, and discuss the issues that have arisen as a result. We can hold the Conference without the presence of the Administrator, and the people of Rivers State and the people of Nigeria will hear and see how we dealt with a very topical issue.

On the N300,000.00 earlier donated by the Rivers State Government, it is undeniable that the money was donated because the Conference was to be held in Port Harcourt, and the economy of the city would have benefited greatly from it. It therefore, necessarily follows that, since the Conference is now relocated away from Port Harcourt, the money should be refunded to the Rivers State Government.

OCJ Okocha, SAN, former NBA President, Port Harcourt

NBA Must Refund the 300 million

Dele Adesina, SAN

I am perfectly in agreement with the decision of the President of the NBA and the Conference Planning Committee to relocate the Conference, having regard to the earlier publicly expressed official position of the NBA on the Government in Rivers State. Having condemned the declaration of emergency and having openly expressed the position that the government is illegal and unconstitutional, the same government cannot be their host. That will amount to self- contradiction. NBA cannot approbate and reprobate, at the same time. NBA has a responsibility to defend the Constitution, not only in words, but also by their actions. In the same vein, NBA is honour and integrity-bound to refund the N300 million.

As a past General Secretary of the Bar, l know as a fact that no person or government pays any price to host NBA Conference. A person or Government can give towards the Conference expenses, if they so desire. It is not true that the money was paid for hosting right. No. If you give me money and you say you are not giving me again, l will refund your money. The money is yours ab initio.

Dele Adesina, SAN, former General Secretary of the NBA

N300m to NBA Is a free Gift, Not Returnable

Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN

To me, NBA moving the Conference from PH to Enugu is well-intentioned, inevitable and based on principles, having condemned the appointment of the Sole Administrator as being unconstitutional (exactly what it is). It would have amounted to approbating and reprobating, to be hosted by a person you said is an illegal occupant of and a pretender to the throne of Governorship. 

Having said that, whether to return or withhold the N300m, depends on what exactly the N300m was meant for. If it was a free grant in the form of a voluntary donation to the NBA towards hosting the AGC, then it is not returnable and must never be returned by the NBA. If however, it was tied to the hosting of the AGC as part and parcel of the total package, then NBA should quietly return the money, without allowing a messy legal duel.

Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN, Constitutional and Human Rights Lawyer,  Abuja

Sole Administrator Doesn’t have the Power to Ask for N300m Refund 

Jonathan Gunu Taidi, SAN

The resolve of the NBA-NEC to relocate the AGC to Enugu, was necessitated by the need to show our disapproval of the removal of a democratic government on terms forbidden by the 1999 Constitution, and the installation of a virtual dictatorship in its stead. Indeed, the NBA should not be associated with such brazen breach of our constitutional democracy.

The N300 million which I understand was meant to facilitate preparations for the Conference hitherto scheduled to hold in Port Harcourt, is now inflicted with force majure. Just as the RVSG spent N300 million, our members have made financial commitments by reserving hotels, booked tickets, etc which are not recallable. In addition, I wonder if the Sole Administrator has the vires to make such demand for a refund.

Jonathan Gunu Taidi, SAN, former NBA General Secretary

N300m Donation Can’t be Refunded

Dr Monday Onyekachi Ubani, SAN

I have read with respectful interest, the recent piece authored by brilliant mind, Dr Ope Banwo, titled “The NBA and the N300 Million ‘Donation’ Mess – Is it Legit Fundraising or Proof of a Compromised Lawyers’ Body?” While I appreciate Dr Banwo’s concern for ethical purity in public institutions and Associations like NBA, his attempt to caricature the NBA’s acceptance of a financial donation from the Rivers State Government of Governor Fubara as a moral collapse or institutional compromise is, at best, overly idealistic, and, at worst, dangerously disconnected from the operational realities of our present national context.

Let me offer a more grounded, pragmatic, and constitutionally defensible perspective.

1. The NBA Committed No Legal or Moral Wrong

Nowhere in the Constitution of the NBA or in any statute regulating professional conduct, has it been declared illegal or unethical for a State government to support the Bar, especially in the context of hosting or facilitating its Annual General Conference. The argument that a donation, in and of itself, constitutes a compromise of institutional independence lacks both legal foundation and factual proof. Dr Banwo’s position is emotive, not evidential. This is without prejudice to NBA returning the funds, if they are convinced that it is the right to do.

One would have expected the learned Dr to cite where such donation contravenes the Legal Practitioners Act, the NBA Constitution, or any provision of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Instead, he launches into broad, moralistic rhetoric that suggests that receiving help to organise a professional event, is a stain on the soul of the Bar. With respect, this is speculative philosophy, not pragmatic institutional analysis.

2. State Support for National Conferences is Not Unusual

Across professional associations in Nigeria – medical, engineering, educational, even accounting, it is routine for State governments to offer financial and logistical support, especially when such associations bring their national conferences to those States. The harsh judgement on NBA over the present donation, is very unfair and unacceptable.

Is it Dr Banwo’s argument that the NBA should finance a multi-million-Naira national Conference purely from annual dues of members, many of whom are struggling to meet basic financial obligations in today’s Nigeria? Most private donors are finding it difficult to render support, due to harsh economic realities in Nigeria. Is such suggestion or expectation realistic, or is it a utopian ideal unsuited to our economic climate?

A Bar Association that aims to remain independent in thought and effective in impact, must be resourced. Denying assistance from State actors, who may genuinely wish to support intellectual and professional engagements, is not a badge of morality; it is the embrace of unnecessary hardship. I am of the view that proper guidelines be mapped out to guide the acceptance, and conditions well spelt out for future engagements with them.

 3. Donation Is Not a Bribe; Intent for it Matters

It is misleading, if not disingenuous, to imply that all donations from political actors are tainted. The mens rea, the intention behind the act, matters in both law and morality. The N300 million donation, to the best of available information, was neither tied to any political loyalty nor offered in exchange for silence or support. Anyone with contrary evidence, can provide same.

As stated earlier, unless there is concrete evidence that the Rivers State Government attached conditions to the donation, or that the NBA leadership acted in a way that directly undermines the Bar’s neutrality in exchange for this funding, it is inappropriate to call it a bribe or a compromise.

4. We Must Not Demonise Benefactors to Appear Holy

Dr Banwo’s argument seems to suggest that accepting financial support from any public officer, automatically makes the Bar complicit in their alleged political sins. This is the kind of extreme moral absolutism, that has no place in responsible advocacy and modern realism.

Should we vilify those who help us, merely because they occupy public office? Are Governors demons whose hands we cannot shake or receive aid from, without risking our moral integrity? This is not how institutions function, not even in the most ethically structured democracies.

5. Realism Must Temper Rhetoric

Dr Banwo urges a refund of the donation, perhaps, as a form of moral atonement. That suggestion, though dramatic, ignores the fact that the NBA’s national Conference planning involves massive logistics, accommodations, technology, and security that member dues cannot cover alone.

What, then, is the alternative? To run a substandard Conference? To scale down our operations to match a depleted treasury, thereby reducing our relevance and visibility in national discourse?

If we are to insist on idealistic financial purity, we must first build an internal revenue base that can shoulder the burden of a world-class conference. Until then, moral high horses cannot pull this cart.

6. This Is Not a Crisis, It’s a Conversation

The conversation about institutional independence, public perception, and ethical boundaries is a legitimate one, and I raised it in my first article. A new practice or jurisprudence may emerge after this matter dies down, either administratively or through court pronouncement.

However, framing this donation as a scandal is unfair to the NBA, and disingenuous to the public.

The Bar must continue to engage with the State and society. We must hold governments accountable, yes, but not at the expense of refusing cooperation, collaboration, or assistance that can help strengthen the legal profession and its institutions. I may be wrong, for I do not claim to know it all.

 7. Let’s Not Burn the Bridge While Trying to Stay Pure

To maintain a principled stance without becoming puritanical, is the real test of leadership. The NBA has not sold its conscience. It has simply accepted a donation, without strings, to advance its professional goals. That, in itself, is not a sin.

If we truly believe in institutional progress and growth, the better approach is not to sever public partnerships, but to manage them transparently, ethically, and with a clear firewall between sponsorship and influence. That is a better and godly position, if you ask me.

The NBA is not for sale. But, neither is it a monastery. It exists in the real world, funded by real people, facing real challenges.

Dr Monday Ubani, SAN, Past Chairman, NBA Section on Public Interest and Development Law (SPIDEL)

N300m Donation to NBA is Non-Refundable

Prof Roland Otaru, SAN

I am of the opinion that the donation to NBA by the Rivers State Government was voluntary with no strings attached, to warrant any refund. In addition, under the Constitution of the NBA 2015, the NBA can receive donations and gifts from individuals , entities and Governments who volunteered to do so. 

On the relocation of the Conference, the NBA has the discretion to do so. This is because Port Harcourt had hosted several NBA Conferences in the past. Port Harcourt hosted the Conference few years ago, during the regime of Nyesom Wike. This case should not create any animosity between the parties.

Prof Roland Otaru, SAN

Demand for N300m Refund is Unjustifiable and Accentuated by Malice

Anthony Malik, SAN

The relocation of the NBA-AGC, was a swift reaction to a nasty occurrence. It couldn’t have been otherwise. Now, days after the proclamation of a state of emergency in Rivers state and the appointment of a Milad by HE, Mr. President, the NBA President issued a statement. That statement speaks for itself. A week or two after, an emergency NBA-NEC meeting held. At that meeting, NEC endorsed the President’s earlier statement, and took a decision to relocate the annual Conference. Personally, I believe that it was the best decision in the circumstance. It would have been a contradiction in terms were the AGC to hold in Port-Harcourt, given the indubitable position embodied in the NBA President’s statement. So, I endorse the decision and commend the NBA President, for his resoluteness and clear-mindedness.

On the issue of the N300m, I cannot find my way through the demand by the Rivers State Milad, for a refund. There can be no basis for that demand. It is unwarranted, unjustifiable, unconscionable and accentuated by malice aforethought. The fact that it was predicated on a faulty premise of assumed “hosting rights”, makes it more laughable! The money was a gift or, at best, a donation towards specific and agreed line items at the conference. For example, Conference bags, pens, jotters, cufflinks, etc. These items, I believe, have already been produced and branded in acknowledgement of the Rivers State Government sponsorship. Significantly, the donation wasn’t made because the Conference was to be staged in Port Harcourt. For the record, I have served on the Planning Committee for NBA-AGC twice, so I know that different State Governments do sponsor or make donations to the NBA for our AGC. Ditto corporate organisations and individuals. So, really, there is nothing novel about gifting NBA N300m or any sum at all, towards our Conference. 

So, I condemn the attempt to demonise the Association, simply because it took a considered position on an issue of national importance and international ramifications. The Milad, by any stretch of imagination, was not appointed to go and fight. However, if he decides that all he wants to use his six months to do or achieve is fight, he is advised to see and appreciate the wisdom in choosing his fight or picking his battles. Strategic engagement, prioritisation, long-term perspective, emotional intelligence, and self-control, are the hallmarks of true leadership. I say no more.

Anthony Aikhunegbe Malik, SAN

N300m is a Gift: ‘Go to Court, We’ll Meet There, NBA Will Not Refund’

Jubril Sam Okutepa, SAN

I have read the views of some of my colleagues that the NBA should return the sum of N300 million donated to it by the legitimate Rivers State Governor for the 2025 Annual General Conference of the Bar, which was initially scheduled to hold in Rivers State in August this year. Some of my colleagues went further to argue that the NBA should not collect money from the Government, and that the NBA must be self-funding. Plausible and sound as these arguments may be, I think most are not rooted in the realities of our situation as Nigerian Lawyers.

But, before returning to this, let me repeat what I said earlier on this N300 million. I have expressed the view that – even if the N300 million given to the NBA by Governor Sim Fubara was for hosting rights as claimed by the illegal and unconstitutional Sole Administrator of Rivers State – it would be unconstitutional and unlawful for the NBA to return the money to the Sole Administrator. Doing so, would amount to recognising him as a legitimate authority in Rivers State. I do not even think the Sole Administrator deserves a reply from the NBA. If he feels strongly about his case, he should go to court and enforce the alleged breach of the hosting rights agreement. We will meet him there. In any case, was he appointed as a debt collector or to restore peace in Rivers State, which his appointors claim Governor Sim Fubara could not? What an absurdity of illegality.

I stand by this view. The illegal and unconstitutional Sole Administrator can go to court. We will meet him there.  

As far as I know, the NBA survives largely on donations from governments and other willing donors, to fund its Annual General Conferences. Conference registration fees alone, are not sufficient to host these events. How many Lawyers in Nigeria, are willing and ready to donate generously to the NBA for its annual Conferences? How much do we pay as membership fees, to fund NBA activities? Even the practising fees are reluctantly paid by many.

While I deeply appreciate the views of my colleagues on the need for the NBA to be self-funded and self-sufficient, we must all commit to financially supporting the Association and ensuring its accountability. The NBA must invest, grow, and become profitable to stand tall. That said, I see no reason to return the money – especially since it was not tied to hosting rights. If we all agree that the NBA should not accept money from the Government, then we must also agree to fund it ourselves.

Jubril Sam Okutepa, SAN, Constitutional Lawyer, Abuja

NBA Can’t Refund the N300m

Ibrahim Mark

It was inevitable, that the Conference would be relocated to a more plausible venue.

Having a state of emergency in existence, means that rights of the people will be curtailed at short or no notice at all. The worrying part being there are no known guidelines on what the Sole Administrator should or should not do, security wise, since the reason for the declaration is failure of security.

The issue of refund must be understood, in the right context. Is the money a hosting right? Do States host NBA Conferences? Or is it the Branches that apply to host the Conferences? Is the State limited to provision of security for delegates and other participants in the Conference week? When these are outlined and known, we can start to determine issue of refund or not.

Mind you the NBA, was given that money by a Government and Governor they term legitimate, democracy wise. NBA has also dubbed the government and Sole Administrator, as illegitimate and aberration to democracy. NBA cannot dine with one they called a devil.

Ibrahim Mark, President, African Bar Association

N300m Was a Gift, and NBA Can’t Refund

Kunle Edun, SAN

The NBA President, Afam Osigwe, SAN has clearly stated the position of the NBA and I fully support it. The current Government in Rivers State is not a democratic government, and the NBA being a responsible organisation, cannot be seen having dealings with anti-democratic forces. 

It was the elected government of Rivers State, that voluntarily gifted the NBA the money. That same elected Government is not in place as at today. Whenever, the true Government of the people returns, the NBA will take it from there. 

Let it be clear to all, that a gift once given is gone for good. In this case, the N300m was purely a gift that was never attached to any hosting right or other conditions, but, to assist towards the AGC preparation like other donors are doing. The other corporate and institutional organisations that partner with the NBA and decided to support the good work of the NBA, make no noise about it. Moreover, the preparation for the Conference did not start today. It actually predates the installation of the semi-military rule in Rivers State. So, the money has been used long ago for what it was intended. If the Sole Administrator is not comfortable with that, he may file an action in Court to recover same. 

Kunle Edun, SAN

Unconscionable for NBA to Keep the N300m

Stephen Kola-Balogun

It would be unconscionable for the NBA as a reputable Association and one which, in many respects, is recognised as the voice of the people,  to hold on to  the so called  N300 million gift given to it by the Rivers State Government, if it has unilaterally taken the decision to no longer hold its annual Conference in Rivers State. If we take seriously our standing as a reputable voice of the people, the money should be returned to the Rivers State Government immediately. It makes no sense to me, for us to take a gift of N300m from the Rivers State Government.

If we are no longer hosting our annual Conference there, that can almost be deemed as taking money through false pretences if we don’t refund the money, and keep intact what’s left of our dwindling reputation.  We have over 500 Senior Advocates. They, along with our top commercial law firms, can easily return N1m each and senior Lawyers like myself, N500,000 or more if need be. It doesn’t even have to be compulsory. Even an optional request would raise sufficient funds that could even leave enough to assist in hosting the rescheduled Conference in Enugu State, without having to go round with our begging bowl yet again. However, I am of the opinion that subsequently, there should be an inquiry  into how the N300m taken from Rivers has been spent. 

Stephen Kola-Balogun, Lagos

No Legal and Equitable Ground for Refund

Kayode Makanjuola 

It is my opinion that those advising that the NBA returns the money, need to be properly informed of the consequences of such advisory. If the NBA makes it a habit of returning every gift given because of intimidation, nothing will stop future donors from demanding return of gifts they make to the NBA, thus, blackmailing the NBA. The NBA must not submit to any blackmail or intimidation. The NBA is right, both in law and on the facts. Any refund at all – if necessary (which I doubt), should not be made during the controversial tenure of Mr Ibas as Sole Administrator; lest the NBA unwittingly endorses his legitimacy – which would  contradict it’s public disavowal of his emergence.

Having said that, even the suspended State Governor, in my view, cannot legitimately demand a refund of the gift, for the simple reason that, that is what it is: an out-and-out gift. It was unconditional. 

There is no legal or equitable ground for such a refund (not even pursuant to a court order) unless, of course, it is reasonably suspected to be the proceeds of a crime by virtue of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2022.

Those introducing morality into the debate, are missing the point. That notion (that the NBA should, as it were, put its money where its mouth is) is misconceived.

Kayode Makanjuola, Lagos