Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has stated that no judicial officer has the authority to order a lawyer or litigant to kneel or face the wall in court.
The NBA made this statement on Tuesday following a report that Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja ordered Marshall Abubakar, a lawyer representing ex-presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore, to kneel for raising his voice during proceedings in a defamation case.
The judge’s action was condemned by Sowore in a social media post, in which he commended his lawyer for standing his ground against the order.
Sowore wrote, “How can you expect justice in a country where a judge orders a competent lawyer to kneel for insisting on cross-examining a fake witness presented by the lawless @OfficialDSSNG? I am glad Barrister Marshal D. F. Abubakar stood his ground. He did not flinch. It was the judge, Justice Mohammed G. Umar, who had to adjourn and leave the courtroom. End of case! And you will never hear the Nigeria Bar Association @NigBarAssoc do anything about this. They are only concerned about the tinted glass permit! Nigeria is finished!”
Reacting, the NBA condemned the incident that occurred on Monday, 16 March 2026, viewing the development with utmost seriousness, given its implications for the dignity of the legal profession and the sanctity of the courtroom.
In a statement signed by its President, Afam Osigwe (SAN), the NBA said the courtroom is a temple of justice, governed by law, procedure, and decorum.
“While judges are vested with the authority to maintain order and discipline in their courts, such authority must be exercised strictly within the bounds of the law and established judicial standards. The power to punish for contempt is well recognised; however, it is circumscribed by defined legal procedures designed to ensure fairness, objectivity, and respect for the rights and dignity of all persons appearing before the court.
“A judex directing a legal practitioner or indeed any person whatsoever to kneel in court is not a recognised judicial sanction under our laws and does not align with the standards of judicial conduct expected on the Bench. The dignity of the court must be preserved not only in outcome but also in process, and this includes the manner in which judicial authority is exercised. If a judge is of the view that a person has acted in a manner that is contemptuous of the court, the judge MUST follow the accepted way of conducting proceedings for such allegations.
“We reiterate that legal practitioners bear a corresponding duty to conduct themselves with restraint, professionalism, and respect for the court at all times. While lawyers are entitled, indeed obligated, to advocate firmly and fearlessly on behalf of their clients, such advocacy must always be exercised within the bounds of courtesy and decorum. Disagreements with the court, no matter how strongly felt, must be expressed through proper legal channels and not in a manner that disrupts proceedings or undermines the authority of the court,” the NBA said.
The association pointed out that the legal profession thrives on a delicate but essential balance, one rooted in mutual respect between the Bar and the Bench. It emphasised that the relationship is fundamental to the administration of justice and must be jealously guarded.
The NBA called for calm and restraint on all sides and urged that any grievances arising from courtroom incidents be addressed through appropriate institutional and disciplinary mechanisms.
“Where necessary, the association will engage with relevant authorities to ensure that the rule of law, professional standards, and judicial ethics are upheld,” it said.
In this article