- Safiu Kehinde
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has faulted the Abuja Federal High Court’s judge, Justice Mohammed Umar, over claims of him ordering Marshall Abubakar, the lead counsel of Human Rights activist, Omoyele Sowore, to kneel before the court for raising his voice.
NPO earlier Reported that the drama ensued during the resumption of Sowore’s trial on Monday.
The activist’s counsels were said to have requested a prolonged date for the adjournment of the ongoing trial.
This was however objected by the prosecution counsel, Kemi Pehinro (SAN).
In reaction, Abubakar argued over the objection, ignoring the judge’s warning of prolonging the argument.
Justice Umar allegedly lost his temper and ordered the lawyer to step forward and kneel down as punishment for what he described as contempt of court.
The defence counsel however refused, insisting it was not recognised under Nigerian law.
Reacting to the development in a statement issued on Tuesday by its President, Afam Osigwe, the NBA faulted the judge’s order, warning of its implication on the dignity of the legal profession.
While acknowledging the judges authority to maintain order and discipline in their courts, Osigwe however held that ordering a lawyer or anyone to kneel before the court is not a recognised judicial sanction.
“The NBA views this development with utmost seriousness, given its implications for the dignity of the legal profession and the sanctity of the courtroom.
“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 NBA President wrote.
Osigwe maintained that the dignity of the court must be preserved not only in outcome but also in process.
This, according to him, 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.” He said.
Osigwe also urged lawyers to exercise their advocacy within the bounds of courtesy and decorum, stressing that disagreement must not be exercised in a manner that disrupts proceedings,
“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 legal profession thrives on a delicate but essential balance, one rooted in mutual respect between the Bar and the Bench.
“This relationship is fundamental to the administration of justice and must be jealously guarded.” He said.
The NBA sued for calm and restraint on all sides and urged that any grievances arising from courtroom incidents be addressed through appropriate institutional and disciplinary mechanisms.
It pledged to engage with relevant authorities to ensure that the rule of law, professional standards, and judicial ethics are upheld.