Presidential candidate in the 2026 Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) National Elections, Lateef Omoyemi Akangbe, SAN, has formally protested the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA)’s decision to reschedule the election date and challenged the guidelines issued for the forthcoming presidential candidates’ debate, warning that he may withdraw from the debate if the concerns are not addressed.
In a formal protest dated 4 July 2026 and addressed to the Chairman of the ECNBA, Akangbe faulted two circulars dated 3 July 2026 but published on 4 July 2026—the revised timetable for the 2026 NBA National Elections and the guidelines for the Candidates’ Debate and Manifesto Day. He argued that both decisions were made without adequate consultation with candidates and raised serious issues bordering on procedural fairness, stakeholder engagement and the integrity of the electoral process.
On the election timetable, Akangbe objected to the committee’s decision to move the election from Monday, 20 July 2026, to Saturday, 18 July 2026. He rejected the ECNBA’s assertion that the decision followed deliberations with candidates during the meeting of 2 July 2026, insisting that no agreement or formal resolution was reached during that meeting.
According to him, the issue arose merely as a suggestion by a candidate for the office of General Secretary, who proposed that holding the election on a weekend could encourage greater voter participation. Akangbe maintained that the proposal was never subjected to a vote, endorsed by consensus, or adopted through any recognised decision-making process. He therefore described the committee’s claim that the revised date emerged from stakeholders’ deliberations as a misrepresentation of what transpired.
He further criticised the manner in which the change was communicated, stating that presidential candidates were neither notified beforehand nor given an opportunity to comment before the revised timetable was released publicly. Instead, he said, candidates first became aware of the decision through the same mass circular distributed to the general NBA membership.
Akangbe also warned that reducing the election timeline by two days significantly compressed critical pre-election activities, including publication of the final voters’ register, mock voting, systems audit and platform lockdown, leaving little room to address any unforeseen technical or administrative challenges before the election.
The presidential candidate also criticised the guidelines for the 8 July 2026 Candidates’ Debate, arguing that the proposed format failed to meet the standards of a genuine debate.
He particularly objected to provisions prohibiting candidates from responding directly to one another during the debate. According to him, rules barring candidates from challenging, criticising or rebutting the positions of their opponents effectively reduce the exercise to a sequence of prepared speeches rather than a meaningful exchange of ideas.
Akangbe argued that the essence of any presidential debate lies in testing candidates’ policies, ideas and leadership abilities through direct engagement, questioning and rebuttal. Without those elements, he said, members of the NBA would be denied the opportunity to assess how candidates defend their positions under scrutiny.
He also questioned the ECNBA’s decision to maintain a fixed speaking order throughout all stages of the debate. While acknowledging that seniority at the Bar could justify determining the order for opening statements, he argued that maintaining the same sequence throughout the programme unfairly advantages some candidates while disadvantaging others.
Drawing from established debating practices, Akangbe advocated a rotational speaking order that would allow each candidate to speak first, middle and last at different stages of the debate, thereby ensuring fairness and competitive balance.
Another major concern raised in the protest was the absence of a dedicated rebuttal session. He contended that without an opportunity for candidates to respond to one another’s claims, misleading or inaccurate statements could go unchallenged, undermining the debate’s credibility and depriving voters of the information necessary to make informed choices.
To address these concerns, Akangbe urged the ECNBA to amend the debate format by rotating the speaking order across the various segments, introducing a structured rebuttal round of about two minutes for each candidate, and revising the rules to permit direct but professionally conducted engagement between candidates during rebuttals.
He warned that should the committee fail to implement the requested changes before the debate, he would withdraw from participating in the Candidates’ Debate and Manifesto Day.
According to him, such a decision would not amount to avoiding public scrutiny but would instead represent a principled refusal to legitimise what he described as a controlled exercise lacking the essential characteristics of a true debate. He added that, if he withdraws, he would make his manifesto and policy positions available to NBA members through alternative platforms where they could be openly questioned and critically examined.
Akangbe concluded by requesting an urgent written response from the ECNBA before the close of business on 6 July 2026, while copying the protest letter to members of the Electoral Committee, the NBA President, the NBA General Secretary and all qualified presidential candidates participating in the 2026 NBA National Elections.