Abdul Atadoga Ibrahim SAN-Led NBA Appeal Committee Under Fire Over Perverse Virtual Attendance Ruling in Garki Branch Election Crisis
The Abdul Atadoga Ibrahim SAN-led NBA Branch Elections Appeal Committee (North) is facing growing backlash from lawyers and stakeholders over what many have described as a “perverse and illogical” decision rejecting virtual attendance for electoral qualification in the 2026 branch elections of the Nigerian Bar Association, particularly within the deeply controversial Nigerian Bar Association Garki Branch.
The Appeal Committee held that only physical attendance registers maintained by Branch Secretaries can be recognized for purposes of qualification under Articles 14 and 15 of the NBA Uniform Bye-Laws. The ruling resulted in the dismissal of appeals filed by Rosemary Ogechi Ogazi, Chekwube Osita Ebubealor, Babatunde Moses Tijani and Oluwaseyi Adedeji Arowosebe, all of whom relied substantially on records of virtual participation in NBA meetings.
In repeated findings, the Abdul Atadoga Ibrahim SAN-led panel insisted that “only physical attendance registers” are valid despite the fact that the NBA Uniform Bye-Laws nowhere distinguish between physical attendance and virtual attendance. The Committee further dismissed online attendance records as unsigned and unauthenticated, a position many lawyers say is inconsistent with the realities of modern NBA administration.
The controversy has become even more damaging because the NBA itself has for years conducted critical activities through virtual meetings. Since 2016, online participation has become an accepted and institutionalized part of NBA governance. Under former NBA Presidents, Paul Usoro, SAN and Olumide Akpata, several important national consultations and policy decisions were conducted virtually. Even under the current leadership of Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, virtual meetings involving Branch Chairmen and Secretaries reportedly played a role in the consultations leading to the amendment of the NBA Constitution last year.
Lawyers are therefore questioning how the NBA can validly conduct constitutional and policy affairs virtually while simultaneously declaring virtual participation useless for branch electoral qualification.
The latest controversy has once again drawn attention to the troubled history of the NBA Garki Branch itself. Since emerging from the controversial fragmentation of the former Abuja Branch, the Garki Branch has remained dogged by allegations of political manipulation, constitutional breaches and domination by allies of the NBA President.
In what many lawyers describe as one of the most embarrassing constitutional crises within the branch, the same NBA Garki Branch earlier this year controversially expelled its elected Chairman, Anthony Bamidele Ojo Esq, without any clear constitutional backing or legal justification. Despite the absence of any known valid constitutional process authorizing the removal or expulsion of a serving Branch Chairman by his EXCO, the branch executive members proceeded to sideline him and have continued to run the affairs of the branch without its elected Chairman from February 2026 till date.
Critics say the continued operation of the branch without its substantive elected Chairman exposes a disturbing pattern of disregard for constitutionalism within the Garki Branch leadership structure.
The growing perception among many lawyers is that the Garki Branch has evolved into a political enclave where rules are interpreted selectively depending on whose interests are affected. Several lawyers allege that constitutional provisions are increasingly weaponized to favour preferred candidates aligned with influential blocs within the NBA establishment while opposing voices are excluded through technical interpretations and procedural maneuvers.
Observers also point to what they consider a glaring contradiction in the Appeal Committee’s reasoning. While the Abdul Atadoga Ibrahim SAN-led panel correctly held in the Kalu Chibuikem Imo appeal that ELCOM lacked powers to disqualify candidates on grounds not expressly provided under the Constitution, the same Committee proceeded to create a distinction between physical and virtual attendance even though no such distinction exists anywhere in the Uniform Bye-Laws.
To many lawyers, the contradiction reinforces fears that internal electoral adjudication within the NBA is becoming increasingly politicized.
DOWNLOAD THE FULL DECISION OF IBRAHIM SAN PANEL DECISION BELOW
