NBA Rejects Mandatory Robing of Civilian Lawyers Before Court Martial, Cites Lack of Legal Basis

The National Executive Council of the Nigerian Bar Association has unanimously rejected a directive requiring civilian legal practitioners to wear robes when appearing before Courts Martial, declaring that the order has no legal foundation under existing Nigerian laws.

The decision was reached during the NBA NEC meeting held on Thursday, 7 May 2026, in Awka, Anambra State, where members considered a letter dated 27 April 2026 written by the NBA President, Afam Osigwe, to the Chief of Army Staff. The letter protested a directive contained in a recent Convening Order establishing a Court Martial to try military officers and soldiers accused of plotting a coup against the Federal Government.

Tension had reportedly escalated at the military facility in Abuja after tribunal officials allegedly threatened to eject defence lawyers from the courtroom if they refused to comply with the dress code directive. Sources familiar with the proceedings said the lawyers challenged the directive, insisting that the tribunal lacked the authority to impose dress requirements arbitrarily.

In its resolution, the NBA NEC maintained that the mandatory robing requirement constitutes an unwarranted extension of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners. The Council argued that Rule 79 of the Rules of Procedure (Army) 1972 merely addresses the categories of persons qualified to appear before a Court Martial and is completely silent on dress code or mode of appearance for counsel.

The NBA further emphasised that the regulation of the professional conduct and appearance of legal practitioners in Nigeria falls exclusively within the authority of the General Council of the Bar pursuant to the Legal Practitioners Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners.

Citing Rule 45 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Council pointed out that the provision specifically lists only the High Courts, Court of Appeal, and Supreme Court as courts where legal practitioners are mandated to appear robed. The deliberate mention of these superior courts, the NBA argued, necessarily excludes other tribunals and bodies not expressly listed, including Courts Martial.

The deliberate mention of these courts necessarily excludes other tribunals and bodies not expressly listed, the NBA stated in its resolution.

The Council also noted that legal practitioners regularly appear without robes before several constitutionally recognised tribunals and quasi-judicial bodies across Nigeria, adding that there was therefore no legal basis for extending the requirement to military courts.

While acknowledging that Courts Martial are recognised courts established under the Armed Forces Act, the NBA NEC maintained that such recognition does not automatically import the ceremonial and procedural rules applicable to superior courts of record under the Constitution, particularly where the governing rules of professional conduct provide otherwise.

Following deliberations, the NBA NEC called on the Nigerian Army to immediately review and withdraw the aspect of the Convening Order mandating civilian lawyers appearing before Courts Martial to wear robes. The controversy comes amid heightened tensions surrounding the military trial of officers and soldiers accused of involvement in an alleged coup plot against the Nigerian government.