INCIDENTS OF TRANSFER AND RE-ASSIGNMENT By Ademola Adewale

A few months ago, both the Lagos State High Court and the Federal High Court with particular reference to the Lagos Division were involved in the massive transfer of judges and re-assignment of cases.

These actions as could be expected resulted in a variety of situations some positive others not so positive, a mixed bag of convenience, inconvenience are even hardships. The first inconvenience experienced by counsel and litigants alike is locating the exact court room of the judges before whom there are appearing. This is in spite of the copious details of the new arrangement of court sittings as set out in a circular under the hand of the Chief Judge dated 16th March 2010. It has taken a few months and several weeks for lawyers to get the exact location of the judges before whom they are appearing. Even now it is still common place for a lawyer to ask another; where is Justice X Court now? Where does Justice Y now sit? Or for a litigant to ask where is Justice Z's court?

Next is the issue of actual transfer of cases, the convenience or hardship it has caused, where for instance a matter in the Lagos State High Court at TBS was part-heard and could not be concluded before the transfer took effect the parties and counsel who have had to drive from the Mainland to Lagos at every trial day are certainly pleased now that the matter is now at Ikeja. On the other hand, the inconvenience of having to travel to Ikorodu from Lagos Mainland for a case that was initially at Ikeja or worse still as in a case I am involved to travel to Badagry.

In respect of the Federal High Court Lagos, a Part heard criminal matter that was at the point of conclusion before final address has now been kept in abeyance by adjournment sine die awaiting the necessary directive from the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for the conclusion of the case in Lagos since the trial judge has now been transferred to Abuja. Yet, the subject matter of the action is in Lagos, and none of the parties has any intention to travel to Abuja to conclude the matter.

In the meantime at both the Lagos State High Court and the Lagos Division of the Federal High Court scores of files and cases are yet to be re-assigned to specific courts more than 3 months after the massive transfer and re-assignment took effect. This is in spite of the spirited efforts of the administration arms of the judiciaries in question. All this contributes in no small measure to the delay in the administration of justice.

A related development even if in the lighter mood is how the transfer and re-assignment has exposed both counsel and litigants alike to the different approaches of different judges. A few true life examples will illustrate this point. In some of the courts some of the judges allow the particular counsel involved in the particular cases to sit in the inner Bar apparently for the purposes of making them speak audibly into the microphone for purposes of recording the proceedings. So imagine counsel who were used to this approach before the first judge who has now been transferred taking their place in the inner Bar to conduct their cases before the new judge only to get a sharp reprimand from the judge freshly assigned to the case who wondered aloud at the presumption of counsel who are not silk who take it upon themselves to sit in the inner Bar. Unfortunately his Lordship did not enquire from the Bar the reason behind this strange behaviour before forming an opinion.

In yet another instance where counsel sought to take his witness through the long drawn examination in chief the preference of the former judge in a court the newly assigned judge cut him short by directing counsel's mind to the provisions of the new rules on the conduct of examination in chief under order 32 of the 2004 Rules which consists of merely adopting witnesses deposition. Counsel's attempt to explain to his Lordship that he was merely trying to play safe by adopting the procedure preferred by the former judge merely irritated his Lordship who expressed the opinion that counsel will do well to familiarize himself with the rules rather than give unconvincing reasons for his incompetence. On other hand there have been instances of counsel who did not impress the new judges in certain courts by their insistence on following the new rules in the manner of the judges who formerly manned the courts. Their Lordship felt their approach was lazy. Indicating their preference for the rigorous old fashioned examination in chief. Interesting studies in contrast!.

The different peculiarities of each judge also provides interesting studies of human character; the patient judge, the not so patient judge, the stickler for the rules and procedure, the 9 O'clock judge, the flexible Judge etc. Still talking about different approaches, while some judges allow any counsel even litigant to remain in their court rooms during pre-trial even if they are not directly involved in the pre-trial conference so long as they do not disturb the court session, yet others insist only parties and the counsel directly involved in the pre-trial Conference to remain in court. Then it is also obvious that some judges are still settling down in their new divisions that is their new administrative divisions; Revenue, General Civil, Family and Probate, Land, Criminal etc. But in accordance with their status as repository of law and procedure; they are adjusting very fast as we the counsel who are appearing before them. After all as an old relation was wont to say no one brought anything from Heaven we all learnt things here on earth.

On the whole in spite of the expected hiccups the process of massive transfer of judges and re-assignment of cases has been by and large effective with all the various stake holders involved, the court and judges, lawyers and litigants alike making the necessary adjustments and it is hoped that by the time we all resume from the annual vacation all the noticeable bottlenecks would have eased off and the system would start to work much more smoothly again.

However, it has been suggested in some quarters that to lessen the normal problems associated with such a serious exercise in future the exercise should be carried out towards the end of the legal year in early July to take effect on the resumption of a new legal year late August and early September perhaps the relevant authorities will look closely at this proposal for such exercise in the future.

APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES: MATTERS ARISING By Ademola Adewale

The recently publicized list of nominations for appointment as judges to the Lagos High Court is already attracting public debate and criticism. That is to be expected. The judiciary as the last hope of the common man must necessarily attract the attention of all sections of the society who are per force stakeholders in the administration of justice thus have both a stake and a say in the men and women appointed to preside over the affairs and disputes of others. Accordingly, the concerned authorities, the Governor, Chief Judge, State-Judicial commission, House of Assembly and indeed the potential judges must take all the comments and criticisms in their stride and in good faith. The situation cannot be otherwise particularly in a mega city/state like Lagos, the nation's commercial capital.

Some of the most pungent criticisms are:
• The list of Nominees standing presently at 28 names is too long and unwieldy.

• By far too many interests are represented on the list, the Magistracy, the official Bar, the party (Action Congress), the Eleko (Oba of Lagos), Ikorodu Oga, Awori; Badagry (Egun) and several other interests.

• Too many women Nominees.

• The list is tilted against private legal practitioners and court going public officers in favour of bureaucratic lawyers and technocrats.

• The presence on the list of a few nominees with disciplinary records.

• If the numbering of the list is anything to go by, then the positioning of nominees is very questionable.

• The absence of consultation with the local branches of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) before the list of Nominees was announced.

How much of these criticisms is justified?

The best approach to start the discussion of this very important topic in which all of us, whether as lawyers, judges, administrators and even ordinary citizens are all stakeholders is to look at the mode of appointment of judges.

IN THE PAST
From my modest studies of Autobiographies. Biographies, memoires and even valedictory speeches of retired judges the common thread that ran through the testimonies of these retired judges is that they were nominated for judicial appointment by Chief Justices/Judges and other senior judges who had watched and observed their conduct in and out' of the court room over time and consulted with other judges and sometimes the leadership of the local bar about the suitability of a particular lawyer for appointment as a judge. Even those from the official Bar were more or less subjected to the same scrutiny. It was not merely a matter of seniority in status of rank that determined suitability for appointment so a Director who did not pull his weight or was altogether unsuitable as a judge could be by passed for a promising Deputy. The lawyers of those days had very little to do with their nomination and appointment as judges. In fact from many of the accounts I read there was always this great feeling of surprise and even trepidation when a lawyer who has never attended a judge in chambers except to move ex-parte applications is informed by a court registrar that the Chief Judge or Administrative Judge will like to see him: what have I done wrong? Did I say anything harsh in Justice Integrity's court? Or is the content of my pleadings or affidavit contemptuous of court etc. Only to be told by the judge that his name has been nominated for appointment to the Bench.

The above informal approach seemed to have worked wonders all the same going by the remarkable achievements of our judges of the days of old v/ho were highly regarded in all parts of the common Law jurisdiction. The above approach accords with the practice in the UK According to .Dame Elizabeth Lane Q.C- First Female English High Court Judge in her Autobiography - Hear the other side- Audi Alterem Partem. "The message was that I was to go to the House of Lords at 2 0' clock that afternoon as the Lord Chancellor (then Lord Gardiner) wished, to see me. My heart stopped beating what could I have done in the county court which could possibly merit a rebuke from the Lord Chancellor himself? Well, perhaps I had been a bit too sharp with that solicitor and an order I had made was perhaps some what unorthodox, but I was sure that I had done nothing which would deserve dismissal. Justice Lane picks up the narrative later "After a few minutes, in which I had not been given the slightest hint of what was to come. I was shown in to the Lord Chancellor. He was very agreeable and then said he wished to appoint me a High Court Judge assigned to the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division. I was stunned, so much so that, to my shame, I had to ask him to repeat what he had said".

As in everything else the American experience is completely different from ours and from that of other common law jurisdictions. The appointment of the (State) County Court Judge and (Federal) District Court Judge varies from state to state. In some states, the appointing authorities can nominate any lawyer directly to Bench either from the academia, legal practice even Corporate in-House Counsel while in some others lawyers actually contest elections to be appointed as Judges. Imagine lawyers printing manifestoes and soliciting for votes to sit on the Bench!!! The appointment to the United States Supreme Court,, which the
Americans call, the U.S. High Court is however more grueling as the Presidential Nominees must face rigorous congressional drilling as in the case of Justice Clarence Thomas and his antagonist Prof (Ms) Anita Ward. Justice Clarence barely got true, while many have been known to fail this grueling Senatorial hearings and their nominations turned down.

However, even this has its downward side as a Judge called Associate Justice apart from the U.S. Chief Justice gets appointed to the United States by virtue of his political leaning. Therefore a listing of the United States Supreme Court Justices from 1789 till date will tell you at a glance the political leaning of a judge. Imagine seeing Ademola Adewale JSC (PDP) and Adesina Ogunlana JSC (A.C)!! (I am not a card carrying member of any registered political party neither do I know Ogunlana to belong to any). Apart from academic interest, it is obvious that the American example is not at all relevant to us in Nigeria.

To return to our theme about the appointment of judges; it is a fact that the old method of appointing judges has since been discarded no thanks to a variety of reasons.

First is the issue of interest groups. Unlike in the past when merit alone was the key factor in the appointment of judges, nowadays merit has to be balanced with other socio-political considerations. These factors which are part of the intractable national question entail that various interest groups in society are represented at all levels of government and administration including the judiciary so as to give everyone a sense of belonging. Thus, where any group appears left out the cry, of marginalization- that is cry of exclusion rents the air. Even the nation's constitution recognizes this by the provision of the highly contentions federal character in Section 14(3) of the 1999 Constitution - the policy which also goes by other names such as Quota System, Zoning and Rotation has been the source of much controversy in the land. In direct relation to the appointment of judges Lagos State presents a peculiar case, because of its status as the former capital of the nation and its cosmopolitan nature it is home to all Nigerians particulars indigenes of neighbouring states most especially Ogun State. Many of these classes of Lagosians, unlike indigenous Lagosians have the unique privilege of wearing two caps, where necessary: The cap of Lagos State, and at other times the Cap of their indigenous states. This dual citizenship is not available to the indigenous Lagosian who has Lagos and Lagos alone his state of origin.

To complete matters, the several sub-ethnic groups in Lagos, the Isale-Eko, Brazilian/Sieria-Leone descendants, Aworis, Ikorodu, the Epes and Eguns (Badagry) naturally expect to be accommodated in the key areas of public life including the judiciary.

Now that appointment to the higher Bench is as comfortable as it is competitive, the level of competition for the High Court Bench is better imagined. The challenge is to balance these various interests with the need to ensure only the best sit on the High Court Bench to dispense justice.

To further compound the problem these are the days of partisan politics, when the interest of party faithfuls cannot be swept aside with a wave of the hand.

PRIVATE V OFFICIAL BAR RIVALRY
For as long as any one can remember there is always a keen but healthy rivalry of members of the official Bar from the Ministry of Justice, Government Departments and Agencies and Magistracy on one hand and private legal practitioners on the other. But in recent times perhaps due to the advent of partisan politics when the party in power automatically controls the personnel of the official Bar, the balance if heavily tilted in favour of the official Bar and the present list of 19 members of official Bar to 9 legal practitioners constitutes almost proof beyond reasonable doubt of this unhealthy tendency.

THE BATTLE OF THE SEXES:
Ordinarily in Lagos as in all parts of South-Western Nigeria, the women have always competed shoulder to shoulder with the men in all areas of life. And from historical even pre-colonial times till present day Lagos women have boasted of as much distinctions as the men. Remember the Madam Efunseke Tinubu, Lady Oyinkan Abayomi, Dr. Abimbola Awoliyi and more relevant to our discourse, Stella Marke, First Lady Magistrate, Justice Omo Eboh First Lady Judge, Prof Jadesola Akande, Mrs. Hairat Balogun, Justice Roseline Omotosho, several Judges serving and retired including the present Chief Judge Justice I. E. Akande, Mrs. Funke Adekoya SAN, Mrs. Ayo Obe and numerous legal practitioners. The ability of our women for even the highest judicial posts in the land has never been in doubt. But at all times the competition with the men has been on equal footing, a list of 19 female nominees to 9 male nominees is anything but equal.

Also suspect is the numbering of nominees: Unless of course the numbering is random. In which case those down on the list are at a disadvantage since the relevant agencies may conveniently focus on those listed above at the expense of those below for the few available sits on the Bench.

On the other hand, if the numbering reflects the official rating or ranking of the nominees, it is with due respect a most questionable and disturbing list. A classic illustration is Mr. Christopher Ayodeji Balogun as No 19 on the list.

A seasoned legal practitioner with excellent pedigree, I dare to say even unguardedly and without solicitation that Mr. Balogun has all it takes to be elevated to the highly coveted rank of SAN. There is no basis whatsoever, for Mr. Balogun to rank lower than No. 3 in any well drawn up list of nominees for judicial appointment not only in Lagos State but any part of Nigeria.

Equally disturbing is the presence on the list of lawyers with disciplinary records some. of whose matters are yet to be disposed off.

The final query in respect of the list of nominees is the noticeable attitude on the part of the relevant authorities not to consult deeply with the local branches of the NBA before purporting to draw up a list of judicial nominees. This is even more disturbing in the face of the resolution at the last Annual Bar Conference Lagos in August, 2009, that the NBA. has to be closely involved in the appointment of judges even with the right to nominate people though the relevant authorities have the final say on who becomes a judge.

CONCLUSION:
It is obvious that the appointment of judges in Lagos State is a very serious affair but with the required sense of responsibility, a credible and transparent approach can still be fashioned out for the appointment of judges in Lagos State that will maintain the delicate balance between ensuring merit and accommodating the various interests .in the state. But the recently published list of 28 nominees is very far from the ideal. It should be completely discarded and a new one drawn up after due consultations.

QUARE:
In the lighter mood, now that the process of nominating .judges is faulty, do we abolish the institution of judges, as some have advocated in respect of the rank of SAN?

OKAFOR V NWEKE AFFIRMED ONCE AGAIN By Ademola A. Adewale Esq.

Ever since the Supreme Court decision in Okafor v Nweke (2007) 3SC (pt 11)55 legal tongues have been wagging, both literally and figuratively about the jurisprudential value of the case. Some scholars have argued that the decision is faulty because of the harshness of the decision. For instance since the decision case after case have been struck out because the court processes were prepared in the firm's name. Cases that have almost been concluded are struck out or dismissed because a party that had consented all along to the procedure suddenly realizes that the court processes were initiated in the firm's name and should thus be dismissed. Appeals at various stages are dismissed not because the appeals are unmeritorious but because at the judgment stage, after briefs have been filed and the appeal argued, the court all of a sudden realizes that the appeal was initiated by a Notice of Appeal filed in the firm's name. in all of these instances the merits otherwise of the cases or appeal count for nothing, neither the amount of legal work that has been done before it dawned on the court or one of the parties that the case was initiated by a court process singed by a firm and not a legal practitioner enrolled at the supreme court.

The litany of judicial woes that have arisen as a result of the supreme court decision in the Okafor vs. Nweke's case have made many scholars to conclude that the decision was arrived at per incuriam without the consideration of other relevant statutes and decisions. Some lawyers in fact argue that all Equities of the case were not argued that is earlier decisions relevant to the case were not brought to the attention of the court. In this vein these legal pundits point out that earlier decision of the Supreme Court in Cole vs. Martins (1968) All NLR 161, where in a similar situation, a court process filed in the name of Lardner & CO. was held properly filed Mr. H. A. Lardner a legal practitioner who was duly enrolled at the Supreme Court who had registered his business enterprise under the existing laws of the time.

Similarly there was the case of Registered Trustees of Apostolic Church Lagos Archdiocese v Akindele (1967) NMLR 263 at 265, where the offending process had been filed in the name of J. A. Cole & CO., a firm registered by Mr. J.A Cole a legal practitioner duly enrolled at the Supreme Court. The court had held that it will not be prevented from such a procedural issue from determining the merits of the case.

Thus in the face of hardship being occasioned by several litigants as a result of the decision in Okafor v Nweke's Case (Supra) where the Notice of Cross Appeal and motion for extension of time to cross-appeal were filed in the name of J.H.C. Okolo (SAN) & Co. was held to be incompetent and struck out because the name JHC Okolo (SAN) 8s Co. was not a person or name enrolled as a Solicitor & Advocate at the Supreme Court on the roll of lawyers in accordance with sections 2(1) and 24 of the Legal practitioners Act, it has been strongly argued that had the cases of Cole vs Martins (Supra) and Registered Trustees of Apostolic Church vs Akindele (Supra) been cited to the court in the Okafor vs Newke's case the decision would have been otherwise. Based on this line of reasoning this legal scholars argue that the Okafor vs Nweke's case should be seen as an isolated departure from the norm and that filing of a court process in a firm's name should be been as a mere irregularity and not a fundamental defect.

However, the full imports of filing a court process in a firm's name has now been put to rest in the recent Supreme Court case of Ogundele vs Agiri (2009) 12 S. C. (Pt 1) 135 (a), 165 1166 in the said case in relation to a brief filed in the name of Ajibola & Co. the Supreme Court had this to say "Before the reservation of the judgment. I had drawn the attention of Mr. Ajibola off record to the fact that their Brief was faulty in that it was signed by "Ajibola & Co" and there is was no evidence that it is a firm duly registered as such. He did not respond to my observation. Even recently in the case of Okafor & Ors vs Nweke & Ors (2007) 3 SC (pt 11) 55, (2007). All FWLR (Pt 368) 1016, this court per Onnoghen JSC dealt with this issue of fact. A partnership or firm, unless duly registered as such, with respect, is not a legal practitioner recognized by law or a person entitled to practice as a barrister and solicitor. See also sections 2(1) and 24 of the Legal Practitioners Act. Cap 207 LFN. See the cases of The Registered Trustees of Apostolic Church Lagos Archdiocese vs. Rahman Akindele (1967). NMLR 263 @ 265, First Bank of Nigeria Pic & Rankassa Enterprises Ltd vs. Alhaji Sulmanu Maidawa dated 27th March 2002 at pages 13 8s 14 - per Mangaji JCA (of Blessed memory) unreported my concurring judgments contributions in Suit No CA/J/234/2000-Major General Musa Bamaiyi (rtd) vs. Danladi A. S. Garila dated 9th December, 2004 (unreported) and CA/J/241/2001- Dominic Nwani v Bakari 85 Anor, also dated 9th December, 2004 (unreported) If learned Counsel who appear before this court, persist in this practice of signing court process in this court as & co, without evidence of being duly registered as such, it may be obliged to disrega rd or discountenance, such process including briefs. Such signing in my respectful but firm view, is NOT an irregularity as held by the court of Appeal per Alagoa JCA, in the case of Unity Bank Plc vs. Oluwafemi (2007) ALL FWLR (Pt 382) 1923 relying on the case of or decision in Cole vs. Martins (1968) ALL NLR 161 (Lardner's case). It is a fundamental error". (Emphasis mine).

The above view of the Supreme Court puts the defective nature of signing or preparing court processes in a firm's name of & Co beyond any dispute. However one aspect of the case that is commendable and worthy of emulation is the dictum that "However, in the interest of the litigants. I will go on for the last time with the merits of this Appeal". This approach of the Supreme Court to do justice to a case in spite of the error of counsel in not properly endorsing a court process shows clearly the court's disposition to place substantial justice above legal technicalities in line with a long line of decided cases.

Uba v Nwora (1978) 11-12 SCI.
Nishizawa v Jethwani (1984) 12 S.C. 234
Nneji v Chukwu (1988) 3 NWLR (pt 81) 184
UTC v Pamotei (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt 103) 244.

Beyond the prmciple of Stare decis embedded in the Supreme Court affirming its earlier decision in Okafor v Nweke what I consider the crux of the recent Ogundele v Agiri's decision is the overriding desire to do justice. It is my humble submission that while Okafor v Nweke remains good law judges ought to reserve the discretion to do substantial justice in matters before them based on the facts even where it appears that the rule in Okafor v Nweke has been breached.

The desire to see justice triumphant and law prostrate must the creed of the court at all times.

LAW AS A FIRST OR POST GRADUATE DECREE By Ademola Adewale

LAW AS A FIRST OR POST GRADUATE DECREE

At a recent book launch in honour of eminent jurist and Chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission ICPC, Justice Emmanuel Olayinka Ayoola, retired Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, foremost lawyer Chief Ate Babalola SAN, re-opened by way of a passing remark an old and lively debate within the legal profession, that is whether or not the law Degree should be taken as a first or a second, that is Post Graduate Degree.

In reviewing the book dedicated to Justice E. O. Ayoola as a Jurist of integrity. Chief Ate Babalola SAN had commented on the fact that Justice Ayoola had first taken a degree in the liberal Arts from Oxford University before proceeding to read law, in which latter discipline he had distinguished himself rising to the pinnacle of the judiciary as a judge of the Supreme Court-Chief Babalola SAN, then proceeded further to make the point that a background in either the liberal Arts or other disciplines was a sine qua non to a successful career in the legal profession and that based on that personal conviction, when its newly licensed University, the Ate Babalola University takes off, only graduates will be admitted to read law in the said University. This effectively indicates the learned silk's position on this age-long debate as to whether the law Degree should be a first or post graduate Degree course in Nigeria.

Without any attempts at an Ad Hominen broadside, I respectfully submit that the learned silk's position is understandable, he himself having first undertaken a Degree in economics before studying law, so quite naturally he is influenced by his background, just as I am willing to concede that yours sincerely having read law as my first degree have never appreciated the clamour for law to be made a post graduate degree.

However, beyond personal preferences, this is one issue that need to be looked at critically and objectively, before coming to a well informed conclusion, moreso when the future of the legal profession depends on how this critical matter is resolved.

Let me start my commentary by a comparative analysis of two sets of Nigeria's great lawyers and judges, those who read law as a first Degree whether or not they possessed post graduate qualification in law on one hand and on the other those who read law as a second Degree whether or not they proceeded to obtain post graduate degrees in law. Permit me to call the former Class A and the latter class B.

CLASS A
1. Chief F.R. A. Williams SAN
2. Mr. Fawehinmi SAN
3. Mr. Kehinde Sofola SAN
4. Chief Richard Akinjide SAN
5. Chief Olisa Chukwurah SAN
6. Chief G. O. K. Ajayi SAN
7. Justice C. Idigbe
8. Mr. Alao Aka-Basom
9. Chief Debo Akande SAN
10. Justice Kayode Eso

CLASS B
1. Dr. Taslim Elias
2. Justice B. 0. Akpata
3. Justice B. 0. Ayoola
4. Mr. Fidelis Nwadialo SAN
5. Chief Obafemi Awolowo SAN
6. Mrs. Folake Solanke SAN
7. Chief Ate Babalola SAN
8. Chief Bolalge SAN
9. Justice C. A. Oputa
10. Justice M. A. Odesanya

*Chief F. R. A. Williams SAN and Justice Kayode Eso may not be perfect examples, as their law Degrees from Cambridge and Trinity College, Dublin respectively, were specialized Degrees that combined both law and liberal Arts, such as LL.B, BA or LL.B, MA.

Still talking comparative analysis, it has been the practice in the United Stages for over a century for Saw to be studied as a Post Graduate discipline, while in England it is not so even till date, so the Americans have had Oliver Wendell llolnnes, Cardozo, Warren, Burger, and the British have had their Dennings, Diplock, Devlings and Hailsham as great Judges.

The question is from the Nigerian illustration and the British/American comparison, which is the better approach, law as a First Degree as obtains in Britain and Nigeria, or law as post Graduate Discipline as obtains in the USA and which of the Class A or Class B lawyers is better. Well, one man's opinion is as good as the other.

Yet another issue that is related to the topic is the question of maturity. It has been said in several quarters that making law a second or post Graduate Degree ensures the maturity of lawyers. The major problem with this reasoning is that no empirical study or data has ever been adduced to show that there is any advantage to be gained from admitting persons to the Bar at a relatively advanced age over admitting persons in their early 20's to the Bar. Neittier has empirical evidence been adduced to show that there is an ideal age bracket for persons to called to the Bar.

In fact from all available evidence a diligent person can succeed irrespective of what age, he is called to the Bar: Chief F. R. A Williams was admitted to the Bar in his early twenties, he succeeded greatly at the Bar, Ditto Chief Remi Fanis Kayode, Chief Awolowwo was in his late 30's he was also a resounding success. Most lawyers get called to the Bar somewhere between their early 20's and 30's yet succeed at the Bar. The point being made here is that the age at which a person is called to the Bar has no relevance to his potential to succeed. Thus, where the issue of a law Degree as a post Graduate discipline is tied to the prospect of enrolling matured persons, at the bar, no cogent and compelling factual evidence has ever been adduced to support this view.

One interesting view point is that the essence of law being made a postgraduate discipline is that by the time a person is admitted to read law, he already has a background in another discipline preferably the liberal Arts which makes the would-be lawyer broad minded and well suited for the learned profession. This is indeed a valid point. However, it is submitted that this presumed advantage is exaggerated, the factual reality is that it is impossible for anyone to make a successful career at the bar and by extension the bench simply on a diet of legalese, that is the law and law alone. A truly legal mind must be grounded in literature, history, the social sciences such as politics, economics, even religion (without being a Fanatic or extremist). And in this age of the computer and the internet, a good grasp of the basic sciences in addition to the analytical and critical approach of science are very vital for making a truly learned mind. And I dare say as a second generation lawyer with almost 25 years of my own personal experience at the bar, most lawyers I have come across be they young and old qualify to be rated as intellectuals n may fields of life particularly in the Humanities. Thus, the emphasis on the possession of a first degree before studying law is with due respect neither here nor there.

Admittedly at the heart of this debate is the concern over perceived fallen standards particularly from new entrants into the profession. The legal profession at least in the last 30 years from the time of the 2ND republic has remained a profession of choice, with practically every other professional in the Humanities and social sciences adding the legal qualification to his resume. Thus bankers, accountants, stockbrokers, corporate gurus are not done with education until they have added the LL.B, B.L to their C. V.'s. The situation is even more graphic under a civilian dispensation as at the present time, retired generals and retired civil servants are not left out of fray. They all want to be known as lawyers particularly when they have political ambitions, so there is a great demand in society for legal qualification.

On the side of the authorities, the measures put in place to ensure quality control is far from ideal, yes the Nigerian University Commission NUC and the Council of legal Education appear to be making efforts to ensure quality control but efforts are often checkmated by the Universities with respect, it is submitted that there are by far too many Universities offering law as a degree programme. To make matters worse these schools do not keep within the quota allocated them by the Council of Legal Education. With the result that the law school is constantly faced with a backlog of qualified students ready to undertake the one year vocational training at the law school. In fairness to the Nigerian Law School and the Council of Legal Education they constantly wield the big stick- withdrawing through the Nigerian University Commission NUC, the accreditation of those schools that exceed their admission quota. But as is usual wish such actions, it is the hapless students that suffer when punitive measures are taken.
However, beyond all this the parameters by which students are admitted to read law even in those Universities that pass both the NUC and CLE accreditation test, unlike in the past when admission to read law was very competitive in the Universities that offered the programme. In some Universities in the past only good A-level passes in 3 Arts Courses were good enough to read law, on the average persons who had less than 10 points could not secure admission to read law, in fact in some years as much as 12 points were required. Even those Universities who admitted through the Joint Matriculation Exam JME, its was standard practice to insist that only candidates with at least 280 points in the JME combined with 5 credit passes at the West African School Certificate Exam WASCE or GCE 0-Level at one sitting were good enough for admission to read law. These days the GCE A-Level or Higher School Certificate HSC Certificate has been dispensed with in all our Universities and even now that admission is entirely through the JME it is not unusual for candidates who scored 200, 210 and 220 which is barely over 50% to be admitted to read law on the basis that those were the highest scores nationally. The big question is must candidates be admitted to read law annually even when they do not meet certain basic academic standards can a certain bench mark not be set say 240 marks an average of 60% in JME below which no students will be admitted to read law in any year no matter how low the general scores. And those marks may be reviewed upward depending on the general scores.

Yet another source of concern is the high number of people admitted to read law not strictly on merit but extraneous considerations such as federal character, quota system, catchment area, vice chancellors list, dean's list, Head of Department's list.

This enthronement of mediocrity through these considerations have had a negative impact on the profession; lawyers who cannot express themselves in simple and correct English and find the simplest of motions difficult to move or argue, lawyers who cannot easily follow proceedings in court not to talk of recording same accurately for either their personal use or that of their principal, lawyers who cannot coherently articulate their view point on any legal issue or an other topical issue of the time for that matter. It is these scenarios that ignited once again the debate as to whether law should be a first degree or postgraduate degree course.

Speaking for myself based on my comparative analysis earlier Nigerian lawyers and judges, and English/American Juristic no evidence has been shown that those who studied law as a post graduate degree are inherently better than those who did law as a first Degree. It is personal devotion and diligence of each lawyer that makes the difference at the end of the day.

Furthermore, for certain socio- economic reasons law should remain a First Degree discipline in Nigeria. To start with mote than 60% of the populace live below the poverty level, and to expect that the average Nigerian family to fund a child/ward through 10-11 years of tertiary education to produce a single lawyer is a most onerous burden on the Nigerian society. Even now that law is essentially a first degree programme it is almost daily becoming a very elitist profession. Tuition fees at the law school is N250,000.00 in addition to the compulsory laptop for each student. Thus on the average it wilt take between N750,000.00 - N 1 million to train a single student through the one year law school programme. This cost does not take into account the expense for the degree programme which is now 5 years in most Universities.

In a country where scholarships are almost impossible to come by even for brilliant students and where education is not subsidized at any level particularly at the University level, how will brilliant but indigent students get the opportunity to become lawyers. As for the riposte that the legal profession is not for the poor and indigent, that cannot be a remark worthy of serious thought in Nigeria irrespective of its validity elsewhere. How many of our present day legal luminaries came from privileged homes?

Suggestions
However, as a senior lawyer and stakeholder in the legal profession, I share the concern of other stakeholders that the present situation of legal education in Nigeria leaves much to be desired and certain changes need to be urgently taken to address the situation and ensure that only the best materials are admitted to need law. My own personal suggestions are:

a. The need to revisit the educational system to reintroduce the HSC/GCE A Level for University admissions for schools that so desire to admit through the said programme.

b. For schools that wish to continue to admit through the JME, the NUC/CLE should insist on a high cut-off mark below which no law faculty should admit no matter how low the performance that year even if it means no person is admitted to read law in any Nigerian University that year.

c. The CLE working with other stakeholders in Nigeria should set a realistic number of people to be admitted to the bar annually, the number should be adhered strictly, and the quota be rigidly enforced by the law school with violations severely punished.

d. Furthermore, the law degree programme should be enriched with the exposure of the law undergraduates to courses in Philosophy, History, Literature, Economics even Political Science. Personally, 1 have always believed the lawyer ought to be truly learned and not limited to knowledge in strict legal issues. My heroes on the Bench have always been those judges who are at home with literature, philosophy, Latin and the like, the Oputa's, Kayode Eso's and Lately Pats-Acholonu of blessed memory. Also on a personal note myself and many of my contemporaries were exposed about 30 years ago at Ife, to a rich academic diet of philosophy. Logic, History, even sociology which even though appeared irrelevant at the time has benefited us immensely afterwards 1 respectfully submit that the modern lawyer stands to benefit from even a greater exposure to these variegated knowledge that can only make him a better lawyer at the end of the day and from which knowledge even the society will be better of.

Finally, while I share the present concern that the training of lawyers is inadequate but I am strongly of the opinion that it is not by making the law degree a second degree that the legal profession and the society will be better off. The law degree should remain a first Degree with the necessary adjustments to meet the realities of the moment.