Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, SAN, has criticised the Nigerian Bar Association for inviting the social media activist Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as Very Dark Man, to speak at its 66th Annual General Conference, and has answered directly the defence of that invitation offered by Professor Chidi Odinkalu.
Falana spoke in an interview with Channels Television on Thursday, commenting on the controversy that followed the activist’s appearance at the conference in Port Harcourt, where he spoke on insecurity.
The senior advocate argued that speakers invited to address lawyers should have relevant expertise or experience in the subject under discussion, and that the Association’s conferences should be platforms for intellectual engagement rather than entertainment.
“In those days, the NBA brought individuals who had paid their dues, who were coming to engage lawyers intellectually. We wanted to learn from them, and so none of our conferences was a side show in the past,” he said.
Falana said the choice of speakers should be governed by the subject, particularly where the subject is specialised.
“So, if you are bringing an expert to discuss the security of the country, either from the private or public sector, such an individual must have contributed to the security architecture of the country,” he said.
He said the alternative undermines the purpose of the gathering. “But when you bring people who have nothing to do with the security of the country, there are problems. It’s like talking about media freedom, press freedom. You are going to bring practitioners in that field, whether in the academics or in the newsroom. But to just go and bring somebody from nowhere to come and entertain you, there are problems with that.”
Put to him that some lawyers, including Odinkalu, had defended the invitation as an opportunity for the profession to receive feedback from members of the public who interact with the justice system, Falana drew a distinction rather than dismissing the argument.
“With profound respect to my very good friend Chidi Odinkalu, he was talking in the general sense. We’re talking of this particular case,” he said.
He accepted the value of public engagement while confining it to its proper subject. “If we are talking about justice delivery in the country, we now want to hear from members of the public, that will have been okay. But if you are talking about the security of the country, it does require that you bring people who are involved in maintaining the security of the country, or who are victims of abductions and the rest of them.”
Falana said the Association should return to what he described as the intellectual tradition of its conferences, recalling addresses that outlived the events at which they were delivered.
“In those days, the submissions of some of our lecturers, like the late Dr Akinola Aguda when he addressed us in 1985, or the late Justice Oputa when he addressed our conference in 1987, for several days and weeks their submissions became matters of public discourse,” he said.
He continued: “Editorial comments were written on them, lawyers debated them even after the conference, and we learned from them. And I think lawyers, as I said, we should go back to that era.”
The senior advocate also said the Association should scrutinise the records of political leaders invited to speak on democracy and the rule of law.
“So if you’re going to have a former head of state to address lawyers to talk about democracy or rule of law, then you must bring someone who can say, ‘When I was in power, there was not a single court order that I disobeyed, I didn’t lock up people illegally, I didn’t harass the media,’ and so on and so forth,” he said.
The remarks are the latest in an exchange that has run through the week and divided senior figures in and around the profession.
The journalist Dr Reuben Abati defended the Association on Wednesday on both counts. On the keynote speaker, the former Liberian President George Weah, he said: “I do not agree with Femi Falana, SAN, when he was saying, oh, the NBA has invited George Weah, former president of Liberia, and that he’s a dictator.” He argued that “in the literature, George Weah is not even, in fact, considered a dictator,” and pointed to the manner of his departure from office. “It was the same George Weah that lost the election to Joseph Boakai. And he handed over power and left.”
On the wider guest list, Abati argued from the sociology of law that “lawyers meeting also have an obligation to listen to their clients, and their clients include uneducated people, roadside people, social media noisemakers,” and that by expanding participation the Association is receiving feedback on how the law functions in society.
Dr Monday Ubani, SAN, took the opposite view in a written interim assessment of the conference, saying that “there are certain personalities who should simply not grace a programme organised for lawyers, irrespective of their popularity, celebrity status or social media standing,” and that the conference “cannot and should not be converted into a circus show.”
The controversy has continued to generate reactions, particularly following the activist’s allegations concerning the conduct of security personnel in relation to kidnapping.
Those allegations have now drawn two formal responses. On 25 August, Douglas Ogbankwa, Esq., Convener of the Security Situation Room, gave him seven days to publish his evidence, retract and apologise, or prepare to substantiate the claims in court. On 27 August, the Nigeria Police Force issued a statement rejecting the allegations as unsubstantiated and inviting him to produce, without delay, the evidence on which he relied, undertaking that any material provided would be investigated thoroughly.
In this article