Television Lawyers …Legal Authorities Must Sanction Them For Sanity To Prevail In Judiciary

The alarm raised by the former Lagos State Governor Babatunde Fashola, which was supported by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, and the Chairman of the Body of Benchers (BOB), Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), over increasing ethical misconduct amongst lawyers, deserves a critical examination by relevant authorities. Sadly, for some lawyers, it is fashionable to misrepresent the judgments of the courts, and ridicule the learned judges, once a judgment does not favour their preferences. Such lawyers, use the conventional and social media as avenue to practice their trade.

The threesome spoke at the maiden annual lecture of the BOB and the presentation of the report of the directions of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) in Abuja. Fashola, who was the keynote speaker, asked rhetorically: “When is the LPDC going to set and enforce new rules for television lawyers?” He went on: “When can a judge refer a petition for unethical conduct in the course of trial against a lawyer?” He noted that in the past “it was an anathema to argue your case on television.”

Like Fashola and other reasonable Nigerians, we are appalled at how lawyers twist the cases of their clients or that of other persons, in which they have personal interest, to gain unmerited sympathy in the public domain. While urging for measures to stem the tide, the CJN said: “It is instructive to note that the Body of Benchers, as the apex institution of the legal profession in Nigeria, is uniquely positioned to lead the charge in this regard.” She however cautioned: “The enforcement of professional discipline among legal practitioners, through the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), is a vital function that must be pursued with fairness, transparency, and unwavering resolve.”

We are by no means saying that lawyers cannot disagree with the judgments of courts. Like every other Nigerians, lawyers are entitled to the fundamental rights provisions in the 1999 constitution (as amended), which in section 39(1) provides for the “freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinion and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.” But we doubt whether the fashionable practice of some lawyers appearing on television to denounce, without facts, the judgments of the courts can be excused as an exercise of a fundamental right. In disagreeing with a judgment of a court, a lawyer is entitled to raise jurisprudential, statutory or even ethical arguments, showing why such judgment is wrong and proffering or canvassing an alternative view point. Such a robust academic exercise helps the development of the judicial process, as both judges and litigants may gain alternative insights to the issues.

But what rankles is the practice of some lawyers making bogus claims whenever any judgment didn’t go their way. Another common practice amongst the so-called television lawyers is to distort the judgments of the court. Even when the language of the court is clear, such lawyers give false colouration to the judgments, in other to confuse the minds of the public. After laying such allegations and creating doubt in the mind of the ordinary person, the lawyers who claimed that the judges acted corruptly take no further step to bring a petition and evidence before the National Judicial Commission, empowered by the constitution to discipline judicial officers.

While the concerned lawyers gain popularity within the public as fearless and bold, the image of the judiciary is dragged in the mud, for what amounts to mere speculation or disingenuous misrepresentation of facts of a case. We agree with Fashola that disciplinary steps should be taken against such misconduct by lawyers. And we urge the BOB to take steps to rein in such unethical lawyers.

©The Nation Editorial