Mandatory CPD: Do What You Requested from Police, Respect Court Proceedings- ABLIF Slams NBA for Disrespect to Court
The Advocacy for Bar Licence Freedom (ABLIF) has issued a public alert cautioning the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the NBA Institute of Continuing Legal Education (NBA-ICLE) against enforcing the Mandatory Continuing Professional Development (CPD) compliance regime, citing ongoing proceedings before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
In a press release dated 11 January 2026, ABLIF disclosed that the CPD framework is the subject of a pending suit before Court 3 of the Federal High Court, Abuja, presided over by Honourable Justice B. F. M. Nyako. The case, Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/2241/2025 – Christabel Zoe Ayuk & 11 Ors. v. Incorporated Trustees of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) & 4 Ors., is scheduled for hearing on 20 January 2026.
According to ABLIF, the court has issued a subsisting bench order directing all parties to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the suit. The group emphasized that the NBA was represented by its legal team during the proceedings and has filed processes in the matter, making it fully aware of both the pendency of the case and the binding nature of the court’s order.
ABLIF noted that the CPD compliance notice circulated by NBA-ICLE, which reportedly fixed 31 March 2026 as the deadline for compliance, touches on issues that are sub judice. The advocacy group maintained that any form of enforcement, compulsion, or sanction related to CPD compliance should be suspended until the court finally pronounces on the matter.
Drawing a parallel with a previous stance taken by the NBA, ABLIF recalled that the Association had once advised the Nigeria Police Force to await judicial determination on the issue of tinted glass permits. The group urged the NBA to exhibit the same institutional respect for judicial authority in the CPD matter.
ABLIF further called on legal practitioners and the general public to take note that the CPD regime and its enforcement are currently before a court of competent jurisdiction, stressing that all stakeholders should await the outcome of the proceedings.
The group reaffirmed its commitment to the rule of law, constitutionalism, and the protection of the professional freedoms of legal practitioners.
