NBA President, Afam Osigwe
Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has expressed strong concern over what it described as disturbing incidents involving judges allegedly bullying lawyers and ordering their detention, warning that such actions threaten the integrity of the justice system.
In a statement issued by NBA President, Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, the association said it received reports “with utmost shock” of judicial officers allegedly using contempt proceedings as a tool to intimidate legal practitioners.
According to the NBA, one of the incidents occurred during proceedings in Suit No. PHC/301/2016, Mr. Bodiseowei Zidougha v. The Chief of Naval Staff & 2 Ors before the High Court of Rivers State presided over by Honourable Justice Chinwendu Nwogu.
The report indicated that after delivering judgment in the case, the trial judge convicted and ordered the detention of the defendants’ counsel, Mrs. Lovinah Ugbana Benjamin, who represented the Chief of Naval Staff and the Nigerian Navy.
The judge was said to have held the lawyer in contempt for allegedly making false statements and imputations against the court in a written address filed in the matter.
The second incident, the NBA said, involved Honourable Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia of the Federal High Court, Abuja, who allegedly issued a summary order for the detention of Martin Anyanwu, a legal officer with the Federal Medical Center, Keffi, in the court’s holding facility on March 25, 2026.
Beyond these incidents, the association noted that there have also been reports of lawyers being subjected to degrading treatment in courtrooms, including being asked to kneel or stand facing walls under threat of contempt.
“These reports are not only frightening but appear to show an increasing intolerance and penchant for abusing judicial powers by some judges,” Osigwe said.
He stressed that such conduct undermines the dignity of the legal profession and weakens the mutual respect that must exist between the Bench and the Bar.
“Judges must not bully lawyers or abuse power to punish for contempt as a tool for intimidation of lawyers,” he stated.
Osigwe described the actions attributed to the judges as unfair and excessively high-handed, noting that they undermine the purpose of contempt proceedings.
“These actions of the learned trial judges are not only unfair but are exceedingly high-handed. We hereby deprecate them. The actions as well as the procedures adopted by the judges fly in the face of the rationale for punishment for contempt, which is the need to vindicate the dignity of the court and thereby protect due administration of justice. The actions appear to have been taken rather to bolster the power and dignity of each of the Judges as an individual,” he said.
The NBA President further warned that the misuse of contempt powers could erode public confidence in the judiciary and instill fear among lawyers and litigants.
“We wish to remind the judges that a judge’s invocation of his power to punish for contempt of his court is an unwarranted exhibition of naked judicial power which puts counsel and their clients in fear of the court and erodes an important safeguard of fair trial,” Osigwe stated.
He also clarified that not every act of perceived discourtesy by counsel amounts to contempt of court.
“In deprecating these actions, we must also remind judges that not every act of discourtesy to the Court by Counsel amounts to contempt, nor any conduct which involves a breach by Counsel of his duty to his client. Courts must distinguish between acts of discourtesy, incivility, uncouth behaviour, or rudeness,” he said.
According to him, while such conduct may be irritating, it does not necessarily amount to contempt unless it obstructs court proceedings.
“While these acts may be annoying, they are not necessarily acts of contempt of Court. Contempt must not be equated with conduct which will inevitably obstruct or disrupt the proceedings of the court or which is not to the liking of the judge. A distinction must be drawn between what may annoy a Judge and what amounts to contempt,” Osigwe added.
He further emphasized that criticism of a judge, when done fairly and in good faith, should not attract punishment.
“It is not a contempt of court to criticize the conduct of a Judge or the conduct of a court, even if such criticism is strongly worded, provided that the criticism is fair, temperate, and made in good faith,” he stated.
The NBA President concluded that lawyers must not be intimidated for performing their constitutional role in court.
“In our view, the power to punish for contempt was abused in these circumstances as the remand orders appear to have been used to assuage the injured feelings of the presiding judge. It is not contempt of court when a judge does not agree with learned counsel’s method of advocacy or with the facts as narrated by counsel. A lawyer has a constitutional right of audience in court and should neither be intimidated nor detained for carrying out this duty. How a lawyer chooses to present his case is his own style.”
