By Clement Nwabuko
ABUJA (PRECISE POST) – The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has criticised the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) over its decision to initiate disciplinary proceedings against lawyer and politician, Kalu Kalu, over his comments on Justice Peter Lifu.
The opposition party warned the NBA against allowing itself to be drawn into what it described as a political campaign against opposition figures, insisting that the Association must remain neutral and defend the rule of law.
The party’s position was contained in a statement issued on Saturday, November 14, 2026, and signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi.
While acknowledging the importance of constructive engagement, restraint and respect for institutions, the ADC described the NBA’s decision to commence disciplinary proceedings against Kalu as curious and questioned why the Association had not reacted similarly to earlier judicial criticisms of Justice Lifu.
The party specifically cited a June 2026 ruling of the Court of Appeal, which reportedly described Justice Lifu’s conduct as the “highest form of judicial impertinence” and referenced a Supreme Court precedent characterising such conduct as judicial rascality.
The ADC questioned why the NBA had not expressed similar concern when the appellate court raised serious issues about the conduct of a judicial officer.
“Why is the NBA only now finding its voice because a politician, who also happens to be a lawyer, has said something that some people find uncomfortable? What has Kalu Kalu said about Justice Peter Lifu that the Court of Appeal has not already said?” the party queried.
The opposition party said it respected the NBA’s historic contributions to democracy and the defence of the rule of law but cautioned that the Association must not create the impression that it was taking sides in the country’s political contest.
It further alleged that the judiciary and the legal profession were being undermined by unethical conduct among some judges and lawyers, arguing that such practices, rather than public criticism, were responsible for eroding confidence in the administration of justice.
According to the ADC, the NBA should be more concerned about alleged judicial misconduct and lawyers accused of facilitating questionable relationships between politicians and judicial officers than disciplining Kalu for expressing his views.
The party maintained that the NBA must not behave like a member of a political coalition against the opposition, stressing that its responsibility was to protect justice, the rule of law and democratic principles.
“The NBA cannot demand respect for the judiciary while appearing indifferent to conduct that brings the judiciary into disrepute. Respect for the courts must never become a requirement for silence in the face of injustice,” the statement added.
The ADC, however, acknowledged that lawyers should exercise restraint in their public comments but insisted that such restraint should not prevent them from speaking against perceived wrongdoing.
“We agree that lawyers must exercise restraint. But there is no respectful way to address evil, and the NBA cannot teach us one,” Abdullahi stated.
