A heated dispute has emerged within Nigeria’s legal community over the Department of State Services, DSS, screening of newly designated Senior Advocates of Nigeria, SANs, with prominent rights lawyer Prof Chidi Odinkalu dismissing criticism as “nonsensical and dishonest”.
The controversy began when Aare Olumuyiwa Akinboro, a Senior Advocate and prospective candidate for the Nigerian Bar Association presidency, condemned the security screening requirement as “a dangerous intrusion into the independence of the legal profession”.
However, Odinkalu, the former chairman of Nigeria’s National Human Rights Commission and current professor at Tufts University’s Fletcher School, has pushed back strongly, with an argument that the screening rules were actually introduced in 2022 by former Chief Justice Olukayode Ariwoola.
“The rule requiring new SAN candidates to be screened by EFCC, ICPC and SSS was made by Olukayode Ariwoola in 2022,” Odinkalu stated in response published by Law & Society Magazine. “No one has called attention to that detail, nor has anyone called him to explain why. But they are frothing.”
The SAN designation, Nigeria’s equivalent to the British Queen’s Counsel system, has been conferred since 1975, beginning with Chief F.R.A. Williams and Dr Nabo Graham-Douglas. The prestigious title is awarded by the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee as recognition of exceptional legal excellence.
Odinkalu noted that the 2022 screening requirements have governed SAN conferments for three consecutive years (2022, 2023, and 2024), with all applicants aware of the conditions before applying. The rules mandate security checks by the DSS, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and Independent Corrupt Practices Commission.
“It is like applying to join the Ogboni and then objecting to the rituals,” Odinkalu argued, dismissing complaints from those who applied knowing the requirements.
Also Read: 56 lawyers emerge senior advocates, one in the academia
The dispute has exposed deeper questions about the independence of Nigeria’s legal profession. Odinkalu challenged the notion of professional autonomy, stating: “A lot of people labour under the misapprehension that we have an ‘independent’ legal profession.”
He outlined how five statutory bodies regulate the legal profession in Nigeria, all with built-in government majorities: the General Council of the Bar, Council of Legal Education, Body of Benchers, Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, and Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee.
“The NBA is an NGO. Or am I missing something?” Odinkalu questioned, suggesting that true professional independence remains elusive.
Odinkalu also suggested political motivations behind the criticism, noting that Akinboro is campaigning to become NBA president and would be “the first from the Southwest since Aketi” – a reference to former Ondo State Governor Rotimi Akeredolu.
The academic pointed out that similar screening requirements exist for judicial appointments through the National Judicial Council, questioning why SAN designees should be exempt from rigorous vetting processes applied to other senior legal appointments.
Under Nigeria’s National Security Agencies Act, the DSS has statutory responsibility for vetting senior appointees, including judges, and SAN designation is considered a senior statutory appointment.
The controversy highlights ongoing tensions between professional autonomy and state oversight in Nigeria’s legal system. While Akinboro argues that SAN conferment should remain “a professional recognition, not a political favour”, Odinkalu contends that the current institutional framework already limits true independence.
As the 2026 NBA presidential election approaches, this dispute may signal broader debates about the direction and governance of Nigeria’s legal profession, with over 690 lawyers having received the SAN designation since its inception nearly five decades ago.
Crediblenewsng.com
