By: Muritala Abdul-Rasheed, SAN, Ph.D
I have read the piece authored by my learned Brother Silk, Mr. Musibau Adetunbi, SAN, titled “Murray and the Hypocrisy of the Blind.”
Ordinarily, I would not dignify personal attacks with a response, but because the issues at stake touch on the integrity of our noble profession and the moral authority of its leadership, silence would amount to acquiescence.
I have therefore decided to respond, calmly, factually, and firmly. I set the issues involved seriatim below:
Mis-Characterization of My Position
At the outset, it is necessary to correct a fundamental misrepresentation. At no point in my earlier writings did I mention, allude to, or implicate Senator Kaka Sheu, SAN or any other individual as being connected with the controversial donation under discussion. As a matter of fact, it is the Spain doctors/attack dogs of the NBA President that dragged the name of the distinguished senator into the controversy in order to cover-up their misdeed.
The introduction of such a name into the conversation by Mr. Adetunbi, SAN is therefore entirely unwarranted, devious and misleading. It diverts attention from the real issue, the conduct of the leadership of the Association, and replaces it with a speculative narrative that I neither advanced nor endorsed.
Public commentary, especially by senior members of the Bar, must be rooted in accuracy and intellectual honesty. It is neither helpful nor honourable to attribute to a colleague, a statement he never made, merely for the purpose of constructing a defensive argument.
The Real Issue: Ethical Accountability, not Personalities
The central question has never been about personalities, it has always been about institutional ethics. The NBA, as the largest body of legal practitioners in Africa, bears a heightened responsibility to model integrity, transparency, and accountability. When the leadership of such an institution engages in conduct that raises legitimate ethical concerns, those concerns must be addressed squarely, not deflected through misdirection.
The acceptance of funds in foreign currency, the non-disclosure of such funds to the broader membership, and the selective distribution of portions of those funds to a limited category of members are not trivial matters. They go to the very heart of fiduciary responsibility and institutional trust.
The Question of Selective Call Against the NBA President
My learned Brother Silk labours under a false premise that I have denied anyone fair hearing. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Calling for resignation in the face of prima facie ethical misconduct is not conviction, it is a call for moral accountability.
Learned Silk Adetunbi, attempts to portray the call for accountability as selective or targeted. This is incorrect. My position has been consistent and unequivocal. Every single person who received any portion of the funds in question, regardless of rank or status, must return the money forthwith to the coffers of the NBA.
However, it is equally important to recognise that responsibility within an institution is not flat, it is graduated. The President of the Nigerian Bar Association is not merely another member, he is the custodian of the Association’s moral authority, the trustee of its integrity, and the public face of the profession.
The ethical burden resting upon that office is therefore significantly heavier than that borne by other office holders and members. Therefore, to insist that all recipients refund the monies while simultaneously calling on the President who superintended the distribution of the money to resign is not selective justice, but proportional accountability.
It reflects the simple principle that the higher the office, the higher the responsibility, and the greater the consequences for ethical failure.
Furthermore, it is a dangerous proposition to suggest that because several individuals may have been involved in an ethically questionable act, no one should be held individually accountable at a higher level.
Institutions do not function on such logic. Leadership carries with it command responsibility. Where a questionable decision originates from, or is authorised by, the highest office, that office must answer for it.
The Integrity of the Judiciary and Institutional Respect
My Learned Brother Silk’s defence also fails to grapple with the deeply troubling comments made by the NBA President regarding the Nigerian judiciary. While it is legitimate to advocate for reform and to speak against corruption wherever it exists, it is a constitutional aberration for the President of the Bar to characterize the entire judicial institution in sweeping and derogatory terms. The first aim and objective of the NBA is “maintenance and defence of the integrity and independence of the Bar and Judiciary in Nigeria” see .s3 (1) of the NBA Constitution 2015 (as Amended in 2025).
The judiciary remains the last hope of the common man. It is an institution that, despite its imperfections, continues to stand as a pillar of constitutional democracy. For the President of the Bar, already under ethical scrutiny, to publicly denigrate the Bench raises serious questions about judgment, restraint, maturity and institutional loyalty.
Claim of “unprecedented ₦1 billion surplus”
One of the claims being touted by the supporters of the NBA President is the “unprecedented surplus” of over ₦1 billion made under the current NBA administration. If that is so, then a simple and troubling question arises; Why were the critical welfare supports for young lawyers abolished under Osigwe led administration?
Under previous leadership, young lawyers benefited from free LawPavilion subscriptions, there was free NBA stamps for all lawyers upon payment of Bar Practice Fees and discounted conference fees for all lawyers. These have been discontinued under the present administration. What then is the value of a surplus that does not translate into support for the most vulnerable members of our profession What tangible project(s) can the present administration point to under Mr. Afam Osigwe as President in spite of the vaunted “unprecedented income?
Recasting the Narrative: From Defence to Responsibility
The attempt by Mr. Adetunbi, SAN to re-frame this issue as an attack on personalities or factions within the Bar misses the point entirely. This is not about factional alignment, it is about restoring the moral high ground of the Association. It is about ensuring that the Bar remains a credible voice in the national conversation on justice, accountability, and the rule of law.
The public watches how the legal profession conducts its own affairs. If we cannot enforce ethical discipline within our own ranks, our moral authority to demand accountability from others becomes severely diminished. I note the attempt to import age hierarchy, ethnic idioms, and cultural insinuations into a discussion that is fundamentally about professional ethics.
With respect to my Learned Brother Silk, the Nigerian Bar Association is not governed by kinship hierarchy. It is governed by rules, conventions, and ethical standards. This is not about who is older or younger. It is about what is right and what is wrong.
Public discourse within the Bar must remain anchored on facts, principles, and fidelity to the ethical traditions that have defined our noble profession for generations. Unfortunately, Mr. Musibau Adetunbi, SAN’s intervention departs from these ideals in material respects.
Conclusion: The Imperative of Honourable Exit
In civilised professional traditions across the world, when a leader’s conduct becomes a source of sustained controversy that undermines institutional credibility, the honourable course is to step aside. Resignation in such circumstances is not an admission of criminality; it is an act of responsibility, a recognition that the office is bigger than the occupant.
The continued insistence on remaining in office in the face of mounting ethical concerns only deepens the crisis and prolongs the damage to the
The Nigerian Bar Association and the legal profession. The choices made in this moment will determine whether it retains its moral authority or slides into ethical relativism.
The path of honour is clear: All monies improperly received should be returned without delay, full disclosure should be made to the membership and the President, bearing the highest moral responsibility, should relinquish his office in the interest of the Association he swore to serve.
This is not a call borne of malice or rivalry; it is a call to conscience. The Bar must remain a beacon of integrity in a nation that desperately needs institutions it can trust.
Muritala Abdul-Rasheed, SAN, Ph.D aka Murray, is a former Publicity Secretary, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)