Rejoinder: EBF endorsement was Untidy, Hasty & Panicky by Justice U John
I have read and digested the the post by the Ikeja Branch (Tiger) Chairman, Mr. Adesina Ogunlana on the above subject and I am inclined to straighten some misconceptions therein; particularly as Mr. Ogunlana acceded in humility and commendable wisdom when he sought a more correct version of the process.
Was it not Socrates who said; “true wisdom is in knowing that you know nothing”. The holy book of the Lord in the epistle according St. Mathew chapter 7: 7&8 states with exactitude thus;
“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you”; “for everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks, finds and the one who knocks it will be opened”
For emphasis and to rest all sentiments and unconstitutional wagging, the EBF adoption of Chief Arthur Obi-Okafor, SAN was never hurriedly put up at the NBA Port-Harcourt House as wrongly conceived by Mr. Ogunlana, rather, the adoption process began at the pen ultimate EBF quarterly meeting in October, 2017, held at Abakaliki. There, the Forum (EBF) constituted the Screening Committee in absolute consonance with the Article 11, EBF Constitution.
It need be further stressed that aspirants were afforded ample time to do the needful. Moreso, the EBF meeting is held quarterly and each meeting comes with an agenda. I refer you to Article 11 of the EBF Constitution and submit that the EBF adoption was constitutional.
It is therefore misleading for anyone to say that the adoption was hurriedly put up at the NBA Port Harcourt house.
I must give kudos however to Mr. Ogunlana for acknowledging the sovereignty of the EBF and submit further that the EBF is indeed irredentist by virtue of the 2015 NBA Constitution, specifically, Section 2.2 of the Second Schedule to the NBA Constitution & Bye Laws.
Following the substantial compliance with the Art. 11 of the EBF Constitution, the question of the process been untidy becomes nugatory and the quarterly meeting of the EBF renders the “hastiness” according to Mr. Ogunlana of no moment.
Mr. Ogunlana should recall at the said EBF quarterly meeting which he claimed to have attended, that upon the presentation of the report/findings by the Screening Committee, a motion to adopt same was moved, seconded and same adopted accordingly. Where then lies the untidiness?
Conclusively, I submit with respect that the assertions by Mr. Ogunlana lacked thoroughness and it is disparaging of a constitutionally healthy process. I further submit that we must refrain from heating up the NBA polity wantonly. Members of the finest profession must continue to be modest, refine, decent, honest, fair and above all, lawful.
Until the EBF and NBA constitutions are reviewed in accordance with the enabling laws, the law is as written. _Lex scripta_
Justice U. John, Esq.