Law Society Rejects CJN’s Ban on ‘Barrister’ Title, Says Directive Lacks Legal Backing

The Nigerian Law Society (NLS) has faulted the directive of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, directing lawyers to stop using “Barrister” as a title and adopt “Esquire” instead.

The society said the directive had no clear legal basis under existing legislation governing the legal profession in Nigeria.

The CJN had directed lawyers and court officials to immediately discontinue the use of “Barrister” before their names in official engagements at the Supreme Court.

The directive was contained in a July 13, 2026 memo signed by the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court, Kabir Akanbi, and addressed to legal practitioners, court registrars and other lawyers.

According to the memo, the measure was aimed at promoting professional standards at the apex court.

However, the NLS, through its Executive Director, Dr Tonye Jaja, in a statement issued on Wednesday, argued that the Legal Practitioners Act, 1962 recognises “Barrister” and “Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria” as titles applicable to lawyers called to the Nigerian Bar.

Jaja acknowledged that using “Barrister” alone does not constitute the full professional title, but argued that “Esquire” is also not expressly recognised by the relevant legislation.

He said the directive could not be traced to any provision of the Legal Practitioners Act, adding that neither the Chief Justice of Nigeria, the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) nor the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) had the authority to impose professional requirements not contained in the law.

“The problem with this recommended title of ‘Esquire’, or even other alternatives ‘Barrister-At-Law’ or ‘Attorney-At-Law’ is that they do not appear inside the Legal Practitioners Act, 1962,” Jaja said.

The NLS also accused the CJN and LPPC of applying inconsistent standards in their treatment of professional titles, particularly over the controversial “Blue Silks” rank of Senior Counsel of Nigeria (SCN).

The society faulted arguments by the LPPC and Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja that the SCN title should not be recognised because it is not expressly provided for in the Legal Practitioners Act.

According to Jaja, the fact that the Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) rank is recognised in law does not automatically render other professional titles unlawful.

He described the decision to restrict the use of “Barrister” while permitting alternatives such as “Esquire”, which is not expressly contained in the Act, as contradictory.

Jaja further argued that the SAN title itself evolved from the British King’s Counsel tradition rather than being directly created by Nigerian legislation.

He said Nigeria adopted the SAN title in 1975 after inheriting the King’s Counsel tradition, which dates back to the 16th century in Britain.

The NLS executive director maintained that the absence of a professional title from a statute does not, by itself, make its use unlawful.

He also said the Senior Counsel of Nigeria title, conferred by the Nigerian Law Society and the Body of Senior Counsel of Nigeria (BOSCON), derives its legitimacy from established guidelines rather than direct statutory creation.

Jaja argued that the guidelines were established pursuant to Section 40 of the Nigerian Constitution and Section 19 of the National Assembly Service Commission Act, 2014.

The NLS therefore maintained that the controversy over professional titles should be addressed through a consistent application of the law rather than selective restrictions on titles used by Nigerian lawyers.