A fresh wave of controversy has erupted in Nigeria's legal and political landscape as Lere Olayinka, Senior Special Assistant on Public Communications and Social Media to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, has publicly challenged renowned human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), over his qualifications and contributions to the legal profession.
In a statement released on Monday, Olayinka criticized Falana’s recent remarks regarding the appointment of legal professionals as Life Benchers, claiming that the senior lawyer has done little beyond making public commentary.
“It is funny and ridiculous that in the mind of Falana, only those who have handled cases in trial or appellate courts are lawyers, and that a lawyer must have done so to be qualified as a Life Bencher,”; Olayinka stated.
Defending the credibility of Wike’s recent nomination to the Body of Benchers, Olayinka said the former Rivers State Governor earned the position on merit due to his tangible contributions to legal education.
He highlighted Wike’s role in developing the Nigerian Law School campuses in Port Harcourt and Yenagoa, as well as ongoing projects under his leadership in the FCT, including a 10-unit housing project for the Law School in Bwari and the provision of operational vehicles.
Turning the spotlight on Falana, Olayinka asked, “What has Falana contributed to the legal profession?”;
He went on to contrast Falana’s alleged lack of infrastructure or educational support with prominent legal figures like Aare Afe Babalola (SAN) and Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), who have invested heavily in law centers and legal initiatives, especially in Ekiti State, Falana’s home state.
Olayinka also accused Falana of misleading the public and clients regarding recent legal decisions, particularly on issues related to the Rivers State House of Assembly. He referenced Falana’s comments on national television disputing the Supreme Court’s role in ruling on the defection of lawmakers, labeling his interpretation “deceptive.”;
According to Olayinka, “It was on the basis of the Supreme Court judgment that the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt dismissed the Labour Party’s suit on the defection matter.”;
He also took issue with Falana’s position that three lawmakers could perform legislative functions in the 32-member Rivers Assembly, arguing it contradicts the constitutional requirement for a quorum.
“If as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, you could tell your client that Section 96 (1) of the Constitution of Nigeria is useless... then questions need to be asked as to how exactly you qualified as a SAN,”; he said.
The statement marks a significant escalation in the ongoing legal and political tensions surrounding the Rivers State Assembly crisis and raises questions about standards within the Nigerian legal profession.
Neither Femi Falana nor his representatives have issued a response as of the time of filing this report.
