A heated debate has erupted within Nigeria’s legal community following the Supreme Court’s recent directive prohibiting the use of the title ‘Barrister’ as a name prefix in official correspondence.
Civil rights advocate and legal scholar, Professor Chidi Odinkalu, criticised the move, arguing that Nigeria’s justice system demands deeper reforms rather than a fixation on professional titles.
On July 13, 2026, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun issued a circular through the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court, directing legal practitioners and court officials to discontinue the use of the title ‘Barrister’ as a prefix to names in all official correspondence, records, documents, and identity materials.
According to the memorandum, the CJN considered the use of the title inappropriate and inconsistent with the standards of professionalism expected within the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
In a detailed article examining the history and evolution of legal practice, Odinkalu contended that while professional standards are important, the directive reflects what he termed a crisis of the wrong priorities.
“How we dress and address legal and judicial vocations in Nigeria is important. But even more important is whether we care to redress the lost mission and ethos of those institutions,” Odinkalu argued.
The legal scholar raised three major concerns with the directive. First, he contended that Nigeria’s justice system faces far more serious challenges that demand attention.
Second, he criticised the directive’s regimental nature, suggesting the CJN could have initiated a broader, inclusive conversation about outdated traditions.
Third, he questioned the inconsistency of banning ‘Barrister’ while some judges, including female judges, continue to insist on being addressed as ‘My Lord’.
Odinkalu drew a compelling comparison with Kenya, where former Chief Justice, Willy Mutunga, embarked on an ambitious transformation of the judiciary after assuming office in 2011 under Kenya’s new constitution.
Mutunga, a former political detainee and law teacher, recognised that Kenya’s legal institutions had been discredited under the old political order and needed fundamental reform.
On May 31, 2012, he launched the Judiciary Transformation Framework, a four-year program designed to align Kenya’s legal institutions with the ethos of the new constitution.
The framework questioned aspects of the legal system’s architecture, rules, dress codes, and rituals, which it said had become disconnected from social reality and contributed to public perceptions of the justice system as alien and insensitive.
Notably, Kenya’s judges voted to discard judicial wigs, describing them as torturous, colonial relics, and cumbersome. They also supported redesigning judicial robes and abandoning the traditional address ‘My Lord’ in favour of ‘Your Honour’ or ‘Mheshimiwa’ in Kiswahili.
Odinkalu observed that Kenya’s courts and legal profession did not collapse, contrary to fears that such reforms would undermine the judiciary. Rather, the country appears to have made progress.
The professor traced the historical roots of Nigeria’s legal profession, noting that Christopher Sapara Williams enrolled at the Inns of Court in England in 1879 and became the first barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in 1888.
“The title ‘Barrister’ became deeply embedded in Nigerian society because lawyers were relatively few, and their principal role was advocacy before colonial courts,” he said.
Odinkalu referenced similar developments in India, where lawyers in Punjab and Haryana stopped addressing judges as ‘My Lord’ or ‘Your Lordship,’ describing such expressions as relics of the colonial past.
In June 2022, the Chief Justice of the High Court of Orissa issued a directive asking advocates to avoid such titles, suggesting ‘Sir’ as a respectful alternative.
The professor acknowledged that ‘Barrister’ does not fully describe the functions or capabilities of every lawyer, noting that the term is rooted in the historical division of the legal profession in England between barristers and solicitors, a structure Nigeria inherited through colonial rule.
In several East and Southern African countries, lawyers are commonly addressed as ‘Advocate’.
However, Odinkalu questioned the breadth of the term official engagements in the CJN’s directive, probing whether it could potentially extend beyond court-related activities to political rallies, cabinet meetings, or university convocation ceremonies.
The legal scholar emphasised that reforming professional titles and courtroom etiquette could be worthwhile, but such changes should form part of a wider transformation rather than become an end in themselves.
“The debate should go beyond whether lawyers should be called ‘Barrister’ or whether judges should be addressed as ‘My Lord’.
“The more important question is whether Nigeria is prepared to restore the mission, values, and public service ethos of its legal and judicial institutions”, Odinkalu stated.
He concluded that although the CJN may have missed an opportunity with the circular, there is still time to redirect the conversation towards meaningful reform of Nigeria’s legal and judicial institutions.
#NigeriaJudiciary #LegalReform #BarristerBan #ChidiOdinkalu #JusticeSystem #ColonialLegacy #JudicialTransformation #NigerianLaw #LegalProfession #SupremeCourtNigeria
All rights reserved. The content on this website, including text and other digital materials, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed in part without the express written consent of The News Accelerator Network.
For advertising inquiries, news coverage, or press releases, please get in touch with us at
📧 thenewsacceleratornetwork@gmail.com
📞 08051017159 or 09019914663
Kindly follow us on: https://www.facebook.com/thenewsaccelerator
You can also subscribe to our YouTube channels here:ucvelrc3winkz7tdmhmzarmqhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/sub_confirmation=1
Post a Comment