The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, on Monday, 11th May, 2026, heard the long-awaited appeal filed by Mr. Tobenna Erojikwe against the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and two other respondents, with the Cross Appeal filed by the NBA taken together with the main Appeal, after a series of adjournments and delays that had stalled the matter for an extended period, with judgment now reserved on a date to be communicated to parties.
The appeal, Mr. Tobenna Erojikwe v NBA & 2 Ors., centres on the Appellant’s demand that the Court of Appeal compel the NBA and the other Respondents to obey the Second Schedule, Part II Paragraph 8 of the NBA Constitution, which requires the Respondents to make available to the Appellant, in a timely manner, critical information, databases and other materials used in the conduct of the election to ensure openness and transparency.
Counsel for the Appellant, Mr. Tobenna Erojikwe, argued that the Appeal was simply asking the Court of Appeal to compel the NBA and the other Respondents to comply with the express provisions of the NBA Constitution.
He submitted that the Second Schedule, Part II Paragraph 8 of the NBA Constitution required the Respondents to make available to the Appellant, in a timely manner, critical information, databases and other materials used in the conduct of the election, and that this obligation was designed to ensure openness and transparency in the electoral process of the Association.
Counsel further argued that the legislative intent behind the provision was to ensure that the electronic voting system of the NBA is above reproach, and that members of the association will have confidence in the process that produces their leaders.
He finally urged the Court to allow the Appeal and grant all the reliefs sought.
The 3rd Respondent in the matter, ElectionBuddy the electronic voting platform engaged by the NBA for the conduct of its elections was absent from Court at the hearing.
In response to the absence of the 3rd Respondent, Counsel to the Appellant moved the Court pursuant to Order 19 Rule 9(4) of the Court of Appeal Rules to deem the 3rd Respondent’s Brief as argued.
The application was granted by the Court.
The Respondents argued against the Appeal and urged the Court to dismiss it.
Senior Counsel for the NBA particularly took the position that the NBA had provided all the relevant information to the Appellant as requested, except the personal data of the voters.
However, in advancing this submission, Senior Counsel for the NBA did not mention which of the materials were provided to the Appellant — leaving unspecified the precise scope of the disclosures the NBA claimed to have made in purported compliance with the constitutional provision at the heart of the Appeal.
Senior Counsel for the NBA also argued a Cross Appeal on behalf of the Association.
The Cross Appeal sought a far-reaching order from the Court of Appeal namely, that the Court should decline jurisdiction to hear the Appeal altogether.
The Cross Appeal, taken together with the main Appeal, represents a two-pronged defence by the NBA: a substantive defence that all relevant information had been provided save for voters’ personal data, and a jurisdictional challenge urging the Court of Appeal to hold that it lacks the competence to entertain the matter in the first place.
Having heard argument on the Appeal and the Cross Appeal, the Court of Appeal reserved judgment on a date to be communicated to parties.
The Appeal raises questions that go to the heart of internal democracy and electoral transparency within the Nigerian Bar Association, the umbrella body for legal practitioners in Nigeria.
At its core, the matter turns on whether the express provision of the NBA Constitution requiring disclosure of critical information, databases and other materials used in the conduct of elections is an enforceable obligation that members of the Association can compel the leadership to obey, or whether it is a provision that can be honoured in the breach without consequence.
The Appellant’s argument that the legislative intent behind the provision was to ensure that the electronic voting system of the NBA is above reproach speaks to a broader concern within the legal profession about the integrity of NBA elections — particularly following the migration of the Association’s electoral process to electronic voting platforms, including the engagement of ElectionBuddy as the 3rd Respondent.
The position of Senior Counsel for the NBA that all relevant information had been provided except the personal data of the voters — without specifying which materials were in fact released — is likely to be a focal point of the Court’s deliberations, given that the constitutional provision in issue requires disclosure of “critical information, databases and other materials used in the conduct of the election.”
The Cross Appeal challenging the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to entertain the matter altogether introduces a threshold question that the Court will have to resolve before, or alongside, the substantive issues raised by the Appellant.
With judgment now reserved, the Nigerian Bar will await the Court of Appeal’s pronouncement on questions that touch directly on the openness, transparency and integrity of the electoral process that produces the leadership of the legal profession’s foremost association in Nigeria.
The date for judgment is to be communicated to parties.
