The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) is facing renewed scrutiny after proceedings in an appeal challenging its refusal to release materials used in the 2024 presidential election were stalled at the Court of Appeal in Abuja due to missing court documents.
The appeal, filed by Tobenna Erojikwe, who emerged first runner-up in the July 2024 NBA presidential election, has attracted widespread attention within the legal community, with many lawyers describing it as a significant test of transparency, accountability, and internal democracy within the association.
Proceedings at the Court of Appeal in Abuja were stalled on Thursday after several important documents, including parts of the respondents’ filings, were reportedly missing from the justices’ case files. The development compelled the court to adjourn the matter until May 11.
The situation arose shortly after the appellate court rejected an application by lawyers representing the NBA seeking an adjournment on the grounds of travel difficulties which allegedly prevented them from attending the hearing in Abuja.
Counsel to the appellant, Okechukwu Umemuo, opposed the request and urged the court to proceed with the hearing pursuant to Order 6 Rule 8(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2021, which allows applications to be treated as argued where parties have filed their processes but fail to appear in court.
At the centre of the dispute is Paragraph 8 of Part II of the Second Schedule to the NBA Constitution, which provides that election materials and related records should be made available to interested parties upon request in the interest of openness and transparency.
Erojikwe maintains that after the July 20, 2024 NBA presidential election, he requested access to materials used in the electronic voting process for audit purposes but was denied by the NBA. He subsequently approached the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory seeking an order compelling the association to release the documents.
The lower court, however, ruled in favour of the NBA, holding that releasing the records without the consent of all lawyers who participated in the election could breach data privacy protections.
The ruling has since generated criticism among some lawyers, who argue that the court failed to consider exceptions under Nigeria’s data protection laws and imposed what they describe as an impractical standard for electoral accountability.
In its defence, the NBA maintained that the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to warrant interference with the judgment of the lower court, insisting that no perversity had been established to justify overturning the decision.
The adjournment has further intensified concerns within the legal community over the transparency and credibility of the NBA’s electronic voting system, particularly as another election cycle draws closer.
