DistantNews
Support us

No legal basis for CJN’s ban on ‘Barrister’ title — Law society

From The Punch · () English

Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources Context piece
  • The Nigerian Law Society rejects the Chief Justice of Nigeria's directive for lawyers to stop using "Barrister" and adopt "Esquire."
  • The society argues the directive lacks a clear basis in existing legislation, specifically the Legal Practitioners Act of 1962.
  • They contend that neither the CJN nor other legal bodies can impose requirements not expressly stated in the Act, questioning the inconsistency in applying standards to legal titles.

The Nigerian Law Society (NLS) has publicly rejected a directive from the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, that lawyers cease using the title "Barrister" and instead adopt "Esquire." The NLS asserts that this directive lacks any clear foundation in Nigeria's current legislation.

Using ‘Barrister’ as a title is a half-truth that leaves out the title of ‘Solicitor’. As an alternative title, the title of ‘Esquire’ or its abbreviated version ‘Esq.’ was to be used as the appropriate suffix by Nigerian lawyers in their official correspondences to the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

— Dr Tonye JajaExplaining the Nigerian Law Society's view on the use of legal titles and the CJN's directive.

In a statement released on Wednesday, the NLS, through its Executive Director Dr. Tonye Jaja, argued that the Legal Practitioners Act of 1962 explicitly recognizes both "Barrister" and "Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria" as valid titles for lawyers called to the Nigerian Bar. Jaja pointed out that while "Barrister" alone might not represent the full professional title, "Esquire" is also not expressly provided for in the relevant laws.

Jaja further questioned the CJN's directive, stating that it cannot be traced to any provision within the Legal Practitioners Act. He highlighted that titles like "Esquire," "Barrister-At-Law," or "Attorney-At-Law" are not mentioned in the 1962 Act. The NLS maintains that under the existing legal framework, neither the CJN, the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC), nor the Nigerian Bar Association has the authority to impose requirements on lawyers that are not explicitly outlined in the Act.

The problem with this recommended title of ‘Esquire’, or even other alternatives ‘Barrister-At-Law’ or ‘Attorney-At-Law’ is that they do not appear inside the Legal Practitioners Act, 1962.

— Dr Tonye JajaHighlighting the lack of legislative basis for the CJN's recommended title 'Esquire'.

The NLS also criticized what it described as an inconsistency in how professional titles are treated, specifically referencing the "Blue Silks" rank of Senior Counsel of Nigeria (SCN). The society faulted arguments suggesting the SCN title should not be recognized because it is not expressly in the Act, while simultaneously promoting "Esquire." According to the NLS, the fact that the Senior Advocate of Nigeria rank is explicitly mentioned in the law does not invalidate other professional titles. Jaja accused the CJN and LPPC of applying double standards in their handling of these professional designations.

The Blue Silks rank of Senior Counsel of Nigeria, SCN

— Dr Tonye JajaReferencing the Senior Advocate of Nigeria title in the context of inconsistent application of legal titles.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by The Punch. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.