April 17, 2025 by and Adebisi Onanuga

The demand by the Rivers State for the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to refund the N300 million it received from the government got the backing of two senior lawyers: Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (SAN) and legal tech expert, Dr Ope Banwo.

For Adegboruwa, there is no basis for the NBA to go “cap in hand” to beg for money to host a conference paid for by lawyers who also pay annual practising fees.

Stressing that lawyers are the conscience of society, expected to champion the rule of law, he said they should not be seen to be romancing with any government amid poverty and rights abuses.

“We have no basis for retaining the ‘gift’ from Rivers State, so NBA should refund the money immediately.

“We should not hide under any semantics or bureaucracy to retain the money,” Adegboruwa said.

The SAN urged his colleagues to contribute N1 million each to cover any deficit if the money had been spent.

Adegboruwa said: “I urge the elders of the Bar to intervene urgently to take away this collective shame.

“If the money has been spent, I urge all SANs and senior lawyers to contribute N1 million each in order to raise the money.

“Going forward, the NBA should tread cautiously in raising funds from all manner of persons and institutions. Lawyers in Nigeria are well endowed to fund any programme for the NBA.”

Banwo, who disagreed with Dr. Monday Ubani (SAN)’s earlier support of NBA’s position, said the issue “goes to the very heart of institutional independence, professional ethics, and the moral compass of the legal profession in Nigeria”.

He said: “The NBA, a body that ought to embody the conscience, independence, and integrity of the legal profession, is caught in a scandal that goes far beyond optics.

“The revelation…has not only triggered a political and legal firestorm—it has raised a fundamental question: Can a supposedly independent professional body continue to claim neutrality while receiving financial handouts from political actors?

“Let us not be distracted by technicalities. Whether the money was conditional or not, whether it was explicitly tagged to the conference venue or not, is beside the point.

“The real issue is the ethical rot and institutional compromise that such transactions represent in principle.

“Whether dressed in legalese or sugar-coated with tradition, the idea that an independent professional body like the NBA should collect hundreds of millions of naira from a sitting state governor—especially one enmeshed in political crisis—is not just problematic; it’s dangerous.

“It sends the wrong message to the public, undermines the credibility of the Bar, and exposes us all to the accusation of hypocrisy the next time we speak on justice, democracy, or the abuse of state power.”

Banwo argued that refunding the money is not a weakness but would be a wise decision.

He added: “The real test of integrity is not what the courts say, but what our conscience says. If the NBA wants to retain its standing as the voice of justice in Nigeria, it must return that money.”

Responding, Ubani faulted Banwo’s views, saying they were “at best, overly idealistic and, at worst, dangerously disconnected from the operational realities of our present national context”.

According to the SAN, the argument that a donation in 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 the NBA returning the fund if they are convinced that it is the right thing to do,” Ubani said.

Insisting that neither the Legal Practitioners Act, the NBA Constitution, nor the Rules of Professional Conduct was contravened, Ubani said it was routine for state governments to offer financial and logistical support to professional bodies, especially when such associations bring their national conferences to those states.

“The harsh judgment on the NBA over the present donation is very unfair and unacceptable…

“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 should be mapped out to guide the acceptance, and conditions well spelt out for future engagements with them,” Ubani said.

Defending the Bar, Ubani insisted that the NBA has not sold its conscience but only accepted a donation, without strings, to advance its professional goals. “That, in itself, is not a sin,” he said.

“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.

“Dr. Banwo wants the Bar to be bold again. I concur. But boldness is not the refusal of help from credible sources, it is the courage to accept support without surrendering principles and integrity.

“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,” Ubani added.