NBA: No Judge Can Order Lawyer To Kneel In Court

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has expressed concern and displeasure over the alleged order by Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja to a lawyer, Barrister Marshall Abubakar, to kneel down within the court premises amid threats of arrest for disobedience.

The president of the NBA, Mazi Afam Osigwe, made the disclosure via his verified X handle yesterday following the incident which occurred on Monday, in Justice Umar’s court.

Sources said Abubakar who appeared as lead defence counsel to Mr Omoyele Sowore, had raised his voice while addressing the court on the suitability of a hearing date, to which the trial judge allegedly issued the directive amid threats.

The NBA president said the NBA viewed the the development with utmost seriousness, given its implications for the dignity of the legal profession and the sanctity of the courtroom.

According to him, a judge has no powers to order a lawyer or anyone else for that matter to kneel down as it was not a recognised judicial sanction under Nigerian laws and does not align with the standards of judicial conduct expected on the Bench.

The statement read, “The courtroom is a temple of justice, governed by law, procedure, and decorum. While judges are vested with the authority to maintain order and discipline in their courts, such authority must be exercised strictly within the bounds of the law and established judicial standards. The power to punish for contempt is well recognised; however, it is circumscribed by defined legal procedures designed to ensure fairness, objectivity, and respect for the rights and dignity of all persons appearing before the court.

“A judge directing  a legal practitioner or indeed any person whatsoever to kneel in court is not a recognised judicial sanction under our laws and does not align with the standards of judicial conduct expected on the Bench. The dignity of the court must be preserved not only in outcome but also in process, and this includes the manner in which judicial authority is exercised. If a judge is of the view that a person has acted in a manner that is contemptuous of the court, the judge MUST follow the accepted way of conducting proceedings for such allegations.

“We reiterate that legal practitioners bear a corresponding duty to conduct themselves with restraint, professionalism, and respect for the court at all times. While lawyers are entitled, indeed obligated, to advocate firmly and fearlessly on behalf of their clients, such advocacy must always be exercised within the bounds of courtesy and decorum. Disagreements with the court, no matter how strongly felt, must be expressed through proper legal channels and not in a manner that disrupts proceedings or undermines the authority of the court.

“The legal profession thrives on a delicate but essential balance, one rooted in mutual respect between the Bar and the Bench. This relationship is fundamental to the administration of justice and must be jealously guarded”.

Meanwhile, the NBA has called for calm and restraint on all sides and urged “that any grievances arising from courtroom incidents be addressed through appropriate institutional and disciplinary mechanisms. Where necessary, the Association will engage with relevant authorities to ensure that the rule of law, professional standards, and judicial ethics are upheld”, Osigwe said.