A fresh dispute has erupted between activist and former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore and the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), following conflicting accounts of an incident at the Federal High Court in Abuja earlier this week.
The NBA had, in a statement issued by its President, Afam Osigwe, SAN, criticised Sowore’s conduct in court, describing it as a breach of courtroom decorum and a potential threat to the integrity of judicial proceedings.
The association argued that while courtrooms remain open to the public, such openness must be exercised with discipline, respect for judicial authority, and adherence to established procedures.
According to the NBA, Sowore entered the courtroom with associates carrying recording equipment and proceeded to create what appeared to be a press briefing environment within the court premises.
The association further alleged that he addressed journalists without the matter being listed before the court and without his legal counsel present.
The NBA noted that such actions disrupted proceedings and created tension among legal practitioners, including Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Musibau Adetunbi, who reportedly objected to the activist’s actions.
The association warned that conduct perceived as undermining courtroom order or intimidating legal practitioners amounts to an affront to the rule of law.
However, Sowore has strongly rejected the NBA’s account, describing it as “misleading” and accusing the association of selective outrage.
In a detailed response shared on his social media platform, Sowore insisted that he was present at the court for a legitimate legal purpose—to obtain a Certified True Copy (CTC) of a ruling that struck out a cybercrime charge filed against him in January 2025.
He explained that the delay in signing the court order stemmed from procedural complications involving motions allegedly filed by the police, which, according to him, contributed to uncertainty around the case status.
Sowore maintained that his presence in court was tied to following due legal processes rather than staging any media event.
The activist also dismissed the claim that he organized a press conference inside the courtroom.
He argued that media interactions in court environments are not unusual and stated that journalists approached him for comments, which he obliged—a practice he described as standard and consistent with his past engagements in high-profile cases.
READ ALSO: NBA Slams Sowore Over Courtroom Conduct, Defends Legal Professional Standards
Sowore further accused the NBA of ignoring alleged abuses by state actors while focusing on his conduct.
He referenced past incidents involving security operatives, claiming that there has been insufficient institutional response from the legal community to such violations.
He also criticized Senior Advocate Musibau Adetunbi, alleging that the lawyer acted in a hostile manner during the incident, including attempts to disrupt recording devices and escalate tensions.
Sowore maintained that no wrongdoing was found by law enforcement officers who later intervened.
“The NBA cannot claim to defend the rule of law while ignoring abuses by powerful state actors,” Sowore said, warning that such perceived inconsistency undermines public trust in legal institutions.
The NBA, however, has stood by its position, emphasising that courtroom decorum is essential to the administration of justice.
The association urged court authorities to ensure that judicial spaces are preserved strictly for legal proceedings and not used as platforms for public advocacy or media engagements.
The disagreement highlights ongoing tensions in Nigeria between activism, media engagement, and judicial protocol, raising broader questions about the boundaries of free expression within court premises and the role of legal institutions in enforcing order.
As both sides maintain their positions, the incident continues to generate debate within legal and civic circles, with observers calling for clearer guidelines to balance transparency with courtroom discipline.