By Dr. M. O. Ubani, SAN
For the first time in my life as a member of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), I was unable to exercise my right to vote in an NBA election.
It was not for lack of trying. I made repeated and strenuous efforts to participate in the electoral process, but all proved futile.
From the commencement of voting, after several hours of reported technical glitch, the One-Time Password (OTP) required to complete the voting process simply did not arrive. After several unsuccessful attempts, the response on my device changed to the now-familiar refrain: “This site can’t be reached.”
Sadly, that remained my experience until voting eventually came to an end.
I was not alone, my son, who is also a lawyer and eligible voter, suffered a similar unfortunate fate. Several colleagues and friends called me during the exercise to complain of substantially similar difficulties. Some even changed from their mobile devices to laptops, which were reportedly suggested as a better means of accessing the voting platform, yet their difficulties persisted.
Against this background, it would be difficult to dismiss these complaints as isolated incidents or the frustrations of a few disgruntled voters.
An electoral process that technically disenfranchises a significant number of eligible voters cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be described as wholly free, fair, credible and inclusive.
There was considerable enthusiasm surrounding this year’s NBA election. Many lawyers were eager to participate because of the attention, mobilisation and expectations generated around the contest. It is therefore deeply unfortunate that many who desired to exercise their franchise were allegedly prevented from doing so, not by their own choice, but by apparent failures in the electoral technology and process.
Whoever insists that there was no problem with the process, in the face of the widespread complaints experienced and reported by members, would simply not be presenting a fair account of what transpired.
This is not, however, an invitation to diminish the victories of those who have been declared winners.
I warmly congratulate Madam Oyin Badejo-Okusanya, the newly announced President of the Nigerian Bar Association, as well as all other candidates who emerged victorious in the election. I wish them a successful tenure and sincerely hope that their leadership will strengthen the Bar, defend the rule of law and advance the welfare and professional interests of Nigerian lawyers.
Indeed, I believe Madam Badejo-Okusanya could still have won resoundingly even without the technical glitches that unfortunately cast a shadow over the process. That is precisely why the issues arising from the election should not be ignored or swept under the carpet.
The legitimacy of leadership is strengthened, not weakened, when legitimate questions surrounding the process that produced it are openly acknowledged and addressed.
The starting point for the new NBA leadership should therefore be a candid interrogation of the electoral process through which it emerged.
There is a useful lesson from Nigeria’s democratic history. When the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua emerged victorious in the controversial 2007 general election, he openly acknowledged that the electoral process that brought him into office was flawed and thereafter initiated electoral reforms. That acknowledgment did not diminish his office; rather, it demonstrated an important willingness to confront deficiencies in the system.
The incoming NBA leadership should demonstrate similar institutional courage.
Madam Oyin Badejo-Okusanya owes the NBA constituency a responsibility to acknowledge the genuine complaints arising from this election and to support a transparent review of what went wrong. The relevant electoral authorities of the Association should provide clear answers: Why did so many eligible voters reportedly experience difficulties receiving OTPs? Why were members confronted with inaccessible platforms and error messages? What was the extent of voter disenfranchisement caused by these technical failures? Were adequate contingency measures in place? And, most importantly, what concrete reforms will ensure that these failures are never repeated?
These questions should not be treated as partisan attacks against the winners. They are institutional questions that go directly to the integrity of the Nigerian Bar Association.
As lawyers, we routinely demand credible elections, transparency and accountability from the Independent National Electoral Commission and other public institutions. The NBA cannot demand from others a standard that it is unwilling to apply rigorously to itself.
The Association must therefore undertake a comprehensive post-election audit and review of the 2026 electoral process. The findings should be made available to members, identified technological and administrative failures should be addressed, and appropriate safeguards must be instituted well ahead of the next election.
Electronic voting should expand participation, not become an instrument however unintended to disenfranchise.
I congratulate the winners once again and wish them well. But let the winners note this, an election in which a presidential candidate, many of my colleagues, my son and persons like me who were ready, willing and eligible to vote could not exercise their franchise because of reported technical failures raises serious questions about the inclusiveness, credibility and fairness of that process.
I am saying so clearly.
The NBA must learn from this experience and correct its shortcomings before the next election.
The time to start is NOW!
Dr. M. O. Ubani, SAN
Legal Practitioner/Policy Analyst
