By IWILADE Akintayo

W e have always preferred the reputation of being democrats to the notorious inconveniencies of practicing democracy. Now we can enjoy the reputation without the inconveniences of practicing democracy because we have trivialized democracy to the extent that it is no longer threatening to those in power or demanding on anyone’·Late Professor Claude Ake (quote available @ http://www.oocities.org/cluadeake/main/quotes.html ) .
Except we urgently begin to exemplify true and unfettered practice of democracy in the running of our National Professional Association- the Nigerian Bar Association-, our claim to being the ‘conscience of the Nation’, ‘the voice of the voiceless’, ‘the bulwark against state tyranny’, ‘guardians of our Nation’s democracy’, etc, might likely become totally untenable.

To regain our place among the leading ideological and organizational lights seeking to genuinely advance the course of liberty, individual freedom and true social development and progress for all Nigerians, we must urgently recreate ourselves and unarguably become shining examples of what we advocate for Nigeria in the area of genuine and unfettered democratic practice.

Regardless of the many distortions the concept has undergone, one agreeable point is that democracy aims, among other crucial things, at enabling the people the unfettered freedom to exercise their inalienable rights to equal and direct participation in the actual choosing of those to lead them through free, fair and transparent processes.

One efficacious way to pursue the attainment of this ideal is to give every member of every community the unfettered right to cast a single equal vote to determine who to lead them. Simply put, the way to democracy is to practice universal adult suffrage as one of the first preconditions for democratic progress- i.e; one person, one vote! one woman, one vote! one man, one vote! one Lawyer, one vote!

In this wise, the Delegates’ voting system, through which National Officers of the NBA have emerged for over a decade, woefully falls short of this pivotal democratic test. The system needs to be discarded if the National Bar is to become the democratic inspiration it ought to be for the rest of Nigeria. Representative voting is an aberration of true democracy or at best, an abridgment of it.

Many reasons have been adduced for the adoption of the Delegates’ voting system currently in use. One is the need to avoid a re-occurrence of the Port-Harcourt stalemate that saw the National Leadership go into non-existence for some years. Another is the view that granting universal suffrage will make Bar elections rowdy, unwieldy and time consuming.

Some other views have been canvassed that universal suffrage will create a sort of ‘mob’ electorate who may dislodge the Senior Advocates from the leadership positions they hold and offer at the Bar. This latter point have however been most effectively demobilised by the deeply engaging thoughts expressed by eminent Professor Chidi Odinkalu (now Chairman, National Human Rights Commission) in his insightful piece, ‘Modernising the Bar: A Necessary Debate’.

Reacting to a view reportedly expressed by a former National President of the Bar, Professor Odinkalu had these in response; “in an effort to clothe an anodyne idea with an adverse animus enough to elevate it to a non-existent danger of existential proportions, the learned Senior Advocate attains undesirable genius with a line that gratuitously insults Senior Advocates and simultaneously gives offence to juniors in claiming that “The only way to dislodge the leadership offered by the rank (of Senior Advocate) is to go for universal suffrage where by way of example juniors who will then be in the majority can be persuaded to vote for the Chairman of the Young Lawyers Forum or any other aggressive Junior or any of the midlevel seniors who are in the forefront of the clamour for universal suffrage”.

In completely dislodging the above argument, the Professor clarified that; “This line of argument manages – rather painfully – to imply that Senior Advocates lack the capability to win through to the Presidency of the Bar unless they are protected from competition and also that juniors lack the judgment to discern from among competitors the ones with serious credentials.

Yet, it is clearly the case that even in the current system Senior Advocates make up less than 18% of the presumptive electorate and thus have shown themselves to be much more durable and competitive leadership materials – but not as a right of birth, tribal hygiene or patronage as the learned Senior Advocate implies”.

On the fears of avoiding a repeat of the Port-Harcourt debacle and in consequence, uncritically sticking to the current undemocratic Delegates’ system, Professor Odinkalu argued very courageously that; “the benefits of the present “Jamboree” are neither clear nor demonstrated beyond its historical links to an admittedly painful historical episode in Port Harcourt 20 years ago. But the world has moved on from 20 years ago.

To be continued