©️ Chinedu Agu
I read, with a mixture of amusement and disappointment, the letter of the Attorney-General of Imo State titled: “NBA Owerri Branch Stand Off – My Position!”
Ordinarily, a letter from the Attorney-General of a State should represent an attempt to calm tension, promote accountability and restore confidence. Unfortunately, this particular intervention raises more questions than it answers.
The most striking irony is that the letter appears less like an impartial attempt to resolve a controversy and more like a desperate effort at damage control for a crisis in which the Attorney-General himself has allegedly become a subject of public scrutiny.
Before examining the Attorney-General’s intervention and infection, it is important, for those who may not have seen the letter or followed the events leading to it, to briefly place the issues in proper context.
At the Branch Meeting of the Nigerian Bar Association, Owerri Branch held on 26 September 2026, a motion was moved by a member of the Branch seeking the removal of the Branch Chairman, Dr. Mazi Udegbulem. The complaint of members was simple. The Chairman had presented an account of how he deployed the ₦100 million donated to NBA Owerri Branch by the Government of Imo State, which was understood by many members to have been provided for the purpose of assisting members who attended the Annual General Conference. [Let me not at this point distract you with the proper motive behind the money, as I have said it _ad nauseam_].
The money, according to concerned members, was never openly acknowledged on the various platforms of the Branch in the same manner other donations had previously been acknowledged. When members began demanding clarification on the application of the funds, the response was not transparency but silence. The various WhatsApp platforms of the Branch were locked for over one week after the AGC, effectively preventing members from asking questions about the money. Those who were stubborn to ask more questions about the money were yanked off from the WhatsApp platforms by the Chairman – Chukwurah Onuorah [Past Secretary of NBA], Stanley Chukwu, Franklin Nwabueze, and many others.
That action alone created suspicion. A leader who receives public or institutional funds and is asked questions about the application of those funds ought not to see inquiries as rebellion.
Rather than first seeking approval from the General Meeting, the Chairman proceeded to embark on several projects, including additional solar installation and upgrade from 12KVA to 26KVA, purchase of air conditioners, additional chairs for the Bar Centre, NHIS subscription, among others, with the total expenditure reportedly running into over ₦80 million.
When members questioned why funds meant for conference support were being deployed to other projects without prior approval, the Chairman’s explanation was that the money was released pursuant to his request to the Governor for those projects. In an attempt to justify this position, he referred members to letters written to the Governor requesting funding for various projects. He also relied on an acknowledgement letter dated 31 August 2026 where he thanked the Governor for donating ₦100 million to facilitate the Annual General Conference and, like Oliver Twist, indicated that he was still expecting assistance for other projects, including solar installation.
However, members took a different view. They argued that the letter of 31 August clearly demonstrated that the ₦100 million donation was specifically connected to assisting members for the Annual General Conference and not a blank cheque for unrelated projects. They further contended that the Chairman had violated Article 12(6) of the Uniform Bye-Law, which requires approval of the General Meeting before projects can be undertaken by the Chairman. They wondered how Chairman could have spent over ₦80 million in a space of less than one month. Consequently, a motion was moved by Chukwuemeka Anyanwu and seconded by the fiery, fearless Ikechukwu Godwin Umah.
What followed was even more revealing. The same Chairman who was accused of breaching the Bye-Law relied on the same Bye-Law to ask Mr. Umah to stand up and walk out from the meeting for taking the microphone to second the motion without his approval, insisting that according to the Bye-Law, it was only the Chairman that could yield the microphone to any speaker.
The reaction was immediate. Over 60% of members present, including senior members of the Bar, walked out of the meeting in protest against the process and what they considered the Chairman’s putrid impudence.
Realising that the process for his removal had commenced yesterday morning with the submission of a proposal/motion for his removal in accordance with Article 13(6) of the Uniform Bye-Law, the Chairman turned to the Attorney-General of Imo State, Paul Obinatu, Esq., who subsequently issued the controversial letter.
The summary of the Attorney-General’s letter is as follows:
1. That his attention was drawn to what he described as a misinterpretation of his comments during the dinner hosted for Imo State delegates at the NBA Annual General Conference in Port Harcourt.
2. That the funds approved and released by the Governor of Imo State, Senator Hope Uzodimma, to the six NBA branches in Imo State were not meant exclusively for sponsoring attendance at the Annual General Conference.
3. That the branches were permitted to apply the funds towards other appropriate branch projects.
4. That branch executives, after consultations, had the responsibility to determine their priorities and decide how the funds should be applied.
5. That spending the entire amount solely on conference expenses would amount to unnecessary expenditure when the funds could also support beneficial projects.
6. That it would be inappropriate for any branch executive committee to spend the entire amount on projects without providing some support for conference delegates.
7. That the NBA Owerri Branch Executive Committee should immediately implement the resolution of the General Meeting held on 26 September 2026, including setting up a committee to investigate the expenditure.
8. That the remaining balance of the fund should be released to conference delegates without delay.
9. That members should avoid actions capable of damaging the image of the NBA.
10. That since the Executive Committee had been pardoned at the General Meeting, the stand-off within the Branch should end.
I must confess that I struggled not to allow the inelegant drafting style of the letter to distract from the substance of this response. But the issues raised are too important to ignore.
The Attorney-General’s intervention requires serious examination.
First, during the dinner in Port Harcourt where the funds were announced, the Attorney-General himself reportedly presented the money as assistance from the Governor to cushion the expenses of conferees attending the Annual General Conference. Therefore, the attempt in the letter to suggest that the funds were not exclusively connected to conference attendance appears to be inconsistent with the earlier public presentation. One cannot speak from both sides of the mouth and expect the public not to notice.
With respect to the directives contained in the letter, I hold the firm view that the Attorney-General acted outside the limits of his constitutional office. The Nigerian Bar Association is a professional association governed by its own Constitution, Uniform Bye-Laws, and internal democratic processes. It is not a department of the Ministry of Justice. It is not an agency of the State Government. It is an independent body of lawyers.
The Attorney-General may express an opinion. He may offer counsel as the leader of the Bar. He may appeal for peace. But there is a fundamental difference between advice and command.
The first directive of the Attorney-General was that a committee should be constituted to investigate the expenditure of part of the funds. This directive is curious because the General Meeting of NBA Owerri Branch had already considered and rejected the proposal for such a committee.
More importantly, the person whose conduct is the subject of the controversy cannot conveniently become the architect of the process that determines whether his own conduct was proper. A man cannot sit in judgment over the fire he is accused of starting.
Few hours after the Attorney-General’s letter circulated, the same Chairman whose removal process had commenced reportedly proceeded to constitute a committee to investigate his own expenditure.
The irony is difficult to miss. It is like asking a person accused of misappropriating funds to appoint the auditor who will investigate him and determine the scope of the audit.
The Attorney-General further directed the Executive Committee to release the remaining balance of the fund to conference delegates. This raises a fundamental question: What is the balance being referred to?
A balance can only be determined after a proper account has been rendered. Where there is controversy over the application of a particular fund, the first obligation is transparency, not disbursement.
How can a Chairman whose expenditure of a particular fund is being questioned release the remainder of that same fund. Even assuming, without conceding, that the proposed committee was properly constituted, why rush to dispose of funds which are themselves the subject of investigation before the investigation is concluded? It is precisely this kind of reasoning that creates distrust. The cure for financial controversy is disclosure, not hurried disbursement.
The most troubling aspect of the Attorney-General’s letter is not even the directives. It is the appeal for forgiveness.
The Attorney-General urged members to avoid actions capable of damaging the image of the NBA and suggested that since the Executive Committee had been pardoned at the General Meeting, the disagreement should end. This, respectfully, is where the intervention completely misses the point.
The problem before NBA Owerri is not a quarrel between friends. It is not a family disagreement that can be settled with a handshake and an appeal for peace. It is an accountability question.
The language of forgiveness cannot be used as a substitute for accountability. Forgiveness is a virtue. It is a moral obligation in many circumstances. But in public institutions, forgiveness without accountability is merely a convenient escape route.
A society that constantly forgives wrongdoing without demanding consequences eventually teaches leaders that consequences can always be avoided. That is one of the reasons Nigeria continues to struggle with institutional failure. We have perfected the culture of asking citizens to forgive leaders, but we have not perfected the culture of asking leaders to answer for their actions. When public officials fail, the first response should not always be “forgive and move on.” Sometimes the first question should be: “Who will answer for what happened?”
A society cannot build strong institutions on endless forgiveness without responsibility. The best form of forgiveness in circumstances like this is not to pretend nothing happened. It is for those entrusted with leadership to demonstrate humility, accept scrutiny, and step aside honourably to allow confidence in the institution to return.
In saner climes, resignation in the face of serious allegations is not automatically an admission of guilt. It is often a recognition that the dignity of an office is bigger than the individual occupying it.
The Nigerian Bar Association is not an ordinary organisation. It is an institution that routinely demands transparency from governments, public officers and public institutions.
Lawyers stand in court every day arguing that power must be controlled by law and that accountability must accompany authority. But an organisation that demands accountability from others must first demonstrate that it applies the same standard to itself. Otherwise, members of the public are entitled to ask: “When accountability knocked on your own door, did you open it?” The standard cannot change because the person involved belongs to our own profession. We are often in the disgusting habit of tolerating a thief because he is our thief.
The Bar must be willing to look at itself.
And that brings me to the second part of this matter, and perhaps the part where the AG will find uncomfortable and unsettling.
The appeal for forgiveness becomes even more concerning when viewed against the allegations that have been circulating regarding the Attorney-General’s alleged involvement in the funds.
Let me state clearly that these are allegations that require proper investigation and verification.
It has been alleged that the Attorney-General and the Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission requested a share from the funds released to the branches and that the Chairman of NBA Owerri was expected to facilitate the collection of such amounts from other branches. It has further been alleged that there was an understanding that the Attorney-General and the Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission were entitled to ₦2 million from each of the five branches, amounting to ₦10 million, with allegations that Owerri’s own share involved a larger deduction of ₦20 million. These allegations are very serious.
If they are true, then the moral foundation for preaching forgiveness becomes questionable.
The allegations surrounding the Attorney-General’s involvement in the funds make it even more important to examine how other branches handled their own allocations.
It is alleged that while some branches may have yielded to pressure regarding these alleged deductions, the Mbaise Branch stood its ground – much to the consternation of the Attorney-General – and insisted that no unauthorised deduction would be made from its allocation. This is despite the AG allegedly struggling to use Chief Mrs. S.C. Nwachi, the Secretary of Mbaise Branch, to secure compliance. If this allegation is true, then the leadership of Mbaise Branch deserves commendation for demonstrating the courage that institutional leadership requires. I will enjoin other branches, especially Owerri, to visit Mbaise Branch and take a course on leadership. Mbaise aaaaahhhhh. Eeeeeeehhhhhhhh!
The Mbaise Branch received its own ₦50 million allocation. But rather than lock their WhatsApp platforms to gag members from asking questions, or rather than hurriedly embark on unapproved projects to retire the money, the Branch convened a meeting of its Advisory Council on 18 September 2026 to determine the appropriate application of the funds.
The Advisory Council of Mbaise Branch resolved that the money would be applied as follows:
1. AGC Delegates Registration – ₦100,000
2. Accommodation – 6 × ₦70,000 = ₦420,000
Transportation and incidentals: ₦100,000 each
Registered delegate support: ₦620,000 × 14 = ₦8,680,000
3. Non-registered members who attended – ₦200,000 each × 6 = ₦1,200,000
4. Landscaping of the Bar Centre – ₦9,000,000
5. Law Week 2027 – ₦4,000,000
6. 2027 BPF – ₦4,000,000
7. Bus procurement/Renovation of Judicial Canteen near the Bar Centre as Aboh Mbaise Customary Court or renovation of existing Customary Court Aboh at the party house – ₦20,000,000
8. Procurement of furniture at Aboh Mbaise High Court – ₦700,000
9. 2026 December Dinner – ₦750,000
10. Labour – ₦1,570,000
This, to my mind, represents what institutional leadership should look like. The Advisory Council was consulted. Decisions were documented. The proposed application of funds was clearly stated.
In NBA Owerri, unfortunately, it appears the Advisory Council is remembered only when its approval is needed by the chairman for certain battles, such as challenging the decision of the National Judicial Council [NJC] on the tenure of the Acting Chief Judge.
On the issue of the utilisation of the funds by NBA Owerri Branch, I have already commenced steps to obtain clarity. Pursuant to my rights under the Freedom of Information Law of Imo State, I have written to the Chairman of NBA Owerri Branch, copied to the Secretary, Financial Secretary and Treasurer, requesting access to the statement of account of the Branch accounts and other relevant financial records concerning the receipt and utilisation of the funds. Pursuant to same law, it will be an offence if the Chairman refuses to oblige in 7 days.
Transparency is not an attack. A person who asks to see records is not an enemy of the institution. A lawyer asking for financial documents should never be treated as a troublemaker. In fact, it is the very culture of questioning that keeps institutions alive.
The Bar teaches the society that evidence matters. The Bar teaches the society that allegations must be tested. The Bar teaches the society that truth survives scrutiny. We cannot abandon those principles when the questions concern us.
Beyond this, I shall, together with other concerned members of the Bar, invite the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission [EFCC] within the week to investigate the movement of the funds received by NBA Owerri Branch within the months of August and September 2026.
The Attorney-General’s letter has revealed something deeper than a disagreement over money. It has exposed a dangerous temptation within institutions, the temptation to protect personalities at the expense of principles.
The issue before us is not about one man. It is not about one Chairman. It is not even about one ₦100 million. It is about whether the Nigerian Bar Association will practise the same accountability it demands from others.
An organisation that investigates governments, challenges public officers and demands transparency from institutions cannot become uncomfortable when similar questions are asked within its own walls.
The Bar cannot be the doctor who prescribes medicine for others but refuses to take the same medicine when sick.
The Attorney-General should understand that peace without justice is not peace. It is merely silence waiting to be broken again.
The solution to this crisis is not to suppress questions. The solution is not to preach forgiveness before accountability. The solution is simple: Open the books. Answer the questions. Allow due process. Let the truth speak.
In the words of our people: _“Eziokwu dị ka mmanụ nkwụ; a naghị ezo ya n’ọkụ.”_ (Truth is like palm oil; it cannot be hidden in the fire.)
The Nigerian Bar Association, Owerri Branch, must decide whether it wants to be remembered as an institution that protected accountability or one that protected those who feared it.
History has a long memory.
Chinedu Agu
Solicitor | Notary Public | Past Secretary, NBA Owerri | Former Political Detainee (FPD)
29 September 2026
05:45hrs.
A story of courage, wonder, and the transformative power of self-belief; perfect for readers aged 10+ who love adventure. To place order: +234 806 130 3237 | +234 803 582 0870 OR Tap the link to grab a copy:https://www.zeekapublish.com/product/the-magical-life-of-anna
