NBA condemns judge’s order for Sowore’s lawyer to kneel in court
By Ishaya Ibrahim
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has condemned the order of a Federal High Court Judge in Abuja ordering the lead defense lawyer for Omoyele Sowore, Abubakar Marshall, to kneel down during proceedings. The NBA described the directive as having no legal basis and incompatible with judicial standards.
The controversy stems from Monday’s session in the case involving activist and publisher Omoyele Sowore, who faces charges related to alleged cyberbullying of President Bola Tinubu.
Lead defense counsel Marshall Abubakar reportedly raised his voice while addressing the court on the suitability of a proposed hearing date, prompting Honourable Justice Mohammed Umar to warn him against contempt and direct him to step out and kneel down in open court, accompanied by threats of committal.
According to multiple reports, the situation escalated to the point where the judge pointed to a spot in front of the bench and repeated the order. Other lawyers present, including a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), intervened by pleading for leniency, and the directive was not carried out.
In a formal statement released Tuesday, NBA President Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, expressed deep concern over the implications for the dignity of the legal profession and the sanctity of the courtroom. He emphasized that while judges have authority to maintain order and punish contempt, such powers must follow strict legal procedures to ensure fairness and respect for rights.
Osigwe stated: “A judex 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.”
The NBA reiterated that lawyers must exercise restraint, professionalism, and respect in court, advocating firmly but courteously. It called for calm from all parties and urged resolution of grievances through proper institutional channels, including disciplinary mechanisms if needed. The association affirmed it would engage relevant authorities to uphold the rule of law, professional standards, and judicial ethics.
