The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, has been dragged into a fresh controversy over the use of the title “Barrister”, with the Nigerian Law Society (NLS) challenging the legal basis of her directive stopping lawyers from using the title at the Supreme Court.
The NLS argued that there is no provision in the Legal Practitioners Act, 1962, empowering the Chief Justice of Nigeria or any legal regulatory body to ban the use of “Barrister” and replace it with “Esquire”.
The controversy followed a July 13, 2026 memorandum signed by the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court, Kabir Akanbi, directing lawyers and court officials to discontinue the use of “Barrister” as a prefix to their names in official engagements at the apex court.
The directive, according to the memo, was aimed at promoting professional standards and ensuring uniformity in official communications at the Supreme Court.
But the NLS, through its Executive Director, Dr Tonye Clinton Jaja, has rejected the move, arguing that the prescribed alternative, “Esquire” or “Esq.”, has no express statutory foundation either.
Jaja said the Legal Practitioners Act recognises the professional designation “Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria”, insisting that while using only “Barrister” may be incomplete, banning it in favour of another title not contained in the law creates a legal contradiction.
He argued that neither the CJN, the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC) nor the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) could impose professional requirements that have no foundation in the governing legislation.
“The problem with this recommended title of ‘Esquire’, or even other alternatives ‘Barrister-at-Law’ or ‘Attorney-at-Law’, is that they do not appear inside the Legal Practitioners Act, 1962,” Jaja said.
The dispute is coming against the backdrop of a wider battle over who has the authority to create, recognise and regulate professional titles within Nigeria’s legal profession.
BLUE SILK BATTLE RETURNS
Jaja’s latest argument is also linked to the controversial “Blue Silk” or Senior Counsel of Nigeria (SCN) rank being promoted by the NLS and the Body of Senior Counsel of Nigeria (BOSCON).
The Federal High Court in Abuja had in May dismissed a suit filed by Jaja and the Association of Legislative Drafting and Advocacy Practitioners (ALDRAP), seeking legal backing for the Blue Silk rank as an alternative to the Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) title.
Justice James Omotosho ruled that the legal profession in Nigeria is regulated by statute and held that only the LPPC has the legal authority to confer the SAN rank. He also restrained the applicants from conferring Blue Silk or related titles not recognised under the Legal Practitioners Act.
The applicants have, however, appealed the judgment, keeping the dispute alive.
Despite the judgment, the NLS and BOSCON subsequently insisted that the conferment of the SCN rank was an internal matter beyond the control of the LPPC, NBA or government institutions.
That background has now added another layer to the “Barrister” controversy.
Jaja accused the CJN and the LPPC of applying inconsistent standards by objecting to titles such as Blue Silk or SCN because they are not expressly mentioned in the Legal Practitioners Act, while supporting “Esquire”, which he said is also absent from the legislation.
He described the situation as contradictory and discriminatory, arguing that the absence of a professional designation from the statute does not automatically make its use unlawful.
‘WHAT ABOUT SAN?’
The NLS also questioned the statutory history of the Senior Advocate of Nigeria rank, arguing that the SAN designation itself evolved from the British King’s Counsel tradition.
Jaja said Nigeria adopted the SAN system in 1975 as a successor to the British King’s Counsel tradition, rather than creating the concept from scratch through Nigerian legislation.
He therefore maintained that professional titles can evolve through established legal and professional practice and that statutory silence, by itself, should not necessarily be treated as a prohibition.
The argument is significant because the LPPC has taken the opposite position on the Blue Silk controversy, insisting that the SAN remains the legally recognised professional rank and warning against the use of competing designations. In February, the LPPC formally rejected the Blue Silk designation and reaffirmed SAN as the highest professional distinction recognised within the Nigerian legal system.
A TITLE WAR AT THE APEX COURT
The latest dispute therefore goes beyond whether lawyers should write “Barrister” before their names.
At its heart is a bigger question: who has the power to determine the titles lawyers may use in Nigeria, and what must be expressly provided for in law before a professional designation can be recognised or prohibited?
For now, the CJN’s directive applies to official engagements at the Supreme Court, while the NLS is challenging its legal foundation.
The development is likely to fuel further debate within the Nigerian legal profession, particularly as the separate battle over the controversial SCN or “Blue Silk” rank remains before the appellate courts.
