By Uzo Ugwunze
Human
rights lawyer and social critic, Sir Ifeanyichukwu Ejiofor Esq, has condemned
the attitude of some lawyers, especially those occupying strategic political
communication roles, who descend to the level of reckless propaganda devoid of intellectual
sincerity just for political crumbs.
In his
recent article titled, ‘The Republic Of Double-Speakers: When Lawyers Become
Merchants Of Convenience And Integrity Is Auctioned For Political Crumbs’,
Ejiofor called on the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to urgently initiate
holistic ethical reforms aimed at restoring dignity, discipline, and
professional responsibility within the legal profession.
“There
was once a sacred era when the legal profession stood as the last moral
cathedral of society — a vocation built upon honour, intellectual discipline,
character, and fidelity to truth. A lawyer’s word was his bond; his integrity,
his most priceless ornament. Today, however, we increasingly witness the tragic
emergence of a dangerous breed of legal practitioners who speak from both sides
of the mouth with astonishing ease, prostituting conviction upon the altar of
political patronage and pecuniary gratification.
“Sadly,
that disturbing era is once again fully upon us.
“During
political campaigns, particularly in the build-up to the 2023 General and
Presidential Elections, many who ought to have embodied restraint, professional
dignity, and ethical sobriety recklessly abandoned every known standard of
decency in desperate attempts to please their political paymasters. Truth
became elastic. Principles became negotiable. Yesterday’s villains suddenly
transformed into today’s saints, not by redemption, but by political
convenience.
“As
lawyers and ministers in the hallowed temple of justice, society expects from
us certain irreducible minimum standards of integrity, consistency, and honour.
Once those entrusted with defending truth descend into the marketplace of
opportunism as professional praise-singers and itinerant propagandists, the
moral foundation of society itself begins to tremble.
“During
the heated political season, spokespersons for various presidential candidates
flooded television screens and media platforms, glorifying their principals
with near-religious fanaticism while demonising opponents with unconcealed
venom. Nigerians watched as individuals like Daniel Bwala and Reno Omokri spoke
with theatrical disdain against the current President, only to later find
comfortable accommodation within the very political establishment they once
condemned with evangelical intensity.
“Even
more profoundly striking was the rhetorical ferocity with which Kenneth Okonkwo
marketed Peter Obi while relentlessly disparaging Atiku Abubakar during the
2023 electioneering process. His media appearances were often saturated with
moral absolutism, indignation, and aggressive certitude, all carefully packaged
to portray one candidate as a messianic redeemer and the other as politically
unworthy.
“Ordinarily,
I watched many of these televised vituperations from afar with reluctant
silence, restrained partly by respect for age and professional fraternity. Yet,
there comes a point where silence itself becomes an accomplice to institutional
decay.
“Having
now carefully revisited the interview clips wherein Kenneth Okonkwo vigorously
vilified Atiku Abubakar in 2023 while passionately promoting Peter Obi, the
presidential candidate of the Labour Party at the time and his then principal,
one is compelled to ask a legitimate and unavoidable question:
“What
precisely distinguishes him today from those he once indirectly mocked and
condemned, now that he reportedly serves as spokesperson to the very same Atiku
Abubakar he once sought to politically diminish?
“Can
any fair-minded and discerning observer genuinely identify the ideological
difference between Kenneth Okonkwo, Daniel Bwala, and Reno Omokri?
“Or are
we merely witnessing the same travelling theatre of political convenience, only
with different costumes, different microphones, and different benefactors?
“The
tragedy is not merely the political migration itself. Democracy permits
association and realignment. The real tragedy lies in the reckless extremism
with which these individuals previously prosecuted their arguments, only to
somersault with breathtaking ease when political winds shifted direction.
“It is
profoundly disturbing that some lawyers, who were certified fit and proper to
be called to the Nigerian Bar, now conduct themselves with the temperament of
motor-park agitators, hurling invectives and manufacturing outrage for
transient political relevance. The law is a noble profession, not a theatrical
circus for ideological acrobats.
“A
lawyer may change political alliances; however, he must never surrender
intellectual honesty, dignity, and consistency at the altar of ambition. The
public must be able to distinguish principled evolution from shameless
opportunism.
“Today,
both Daniel Bwala and Reno Omokri appear to have been politically rewarded
after swallowing their own public utterances with astonishing appetite. Yet,
beyond appointments and political proximity lies a far more important question:
what becomes of credibility once a man repeatedly contradicts himself before
the full glare of history?
“Indeed,
there is something profoundly tragic about men who once spoke with volcanic
certainty against certain political actors, only to later dine comfortably at
the same tables they once described as poisonous.
“This
is precisely why the Nigerian Bar Association must urgently initiate holistic
ethical reforms aimed at restoring dignity, discipline, and professional
responsibility within the legal profession. Public conduct, especially by
lawyers occupying strategic political communication roles, must not descend to
the level of reckless propaganda devoid of intellectual sincerity.
“May
Nigeria never fall permanently into the hands of professional double-speakers,
ideological chameleons, and merchants of convenient outrage whose convictions
evaporate immediately after political appointments arrive.
“History
is patient. Public memory may sometimes appear weak, but eventually posterity
documents every contradiction with merciless precision.
“And when that final verdict of history is rendered, no
amount of televised eloquence will rescue the integrity that was willingly
traded for political crumbs,” Ejiofor warned.
Post a Comment