ADC Tackles NBA Over Kalu Disciplinary Proceedings

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has criticised the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) for initiating disciplinary proceedings against lawyer and politician, Kalu Kalu, over his comments on Justice Peter Lifu, accusing the association of taking sides in the political battle against the opposition.

The party also warned the NBA against allowing itself to be drawn into what it described as a political coalition against opposition figures, insisting that criticism of judicial conduct should not be interpreted as disrespect for the judiciary.

In a statement on Saturday, signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC questioned the NBA’s decision to act against Kalu, asking why the association had not shown similar concern when the Court of Appeal criticised Justice Lifu in its June 2026 ruling.

The party cited the appellate court’s description of the judge’s conduct as the “highest form of judicial impertinence”, adding that the court had also invoked a Supreme Court precedent describing such conduct as judicial rascality.

“Where was the NBA when the judiciary itself was expressing such grave concerns about the conduct of one of its own?” the ADC asked.

While acknowledging the NBA’s contributions to democracy and the rule of law, the party cautioned that its latest action could create the impression that it was aligning with the ruling party against the opposition.

The ADC alleged that the real threat to public confidence in the judiciary was not criticism from politicians but the conduct of judges and lawyers allegedly involved in compromising the administration of justice.

“It is not Kalu’s words that smear the judiciary. What discredits the Bench and the Bar is the conduct of conscienceless judges like Lifu and equally conscienceless lawyers who are alleged to operate a network of client judges in the service of conscienceless politicians in power,” the statement said.

The party maintained that the NBA should be more concerned about alleged judicial misconduct than taking disciplinary action against a lawyer for expressing his political views.

It further argued that respect for the judiciary should not become an excuse for silence in the face of perceived injustice.

“The NBA is not a political party. It must, therefore, not be seen to be behaving like a member of a political coalition against the opposition, whose demand is simply that justice be done, that the rule of law be protected and that democracy be preserved,” it said.

Although the ADC acknowledged the need for lawyers to exercise restraint in their public engagements, it insisted that such restraint should not prevent them from speaking out against wrongdoing.

“We agree that lawyers must exercise restraint. But there is no respectful way to address evil, and the NBA cannot teach us one,” the party declared.