A bill proposing a mandatory two-year apprenticeship for law graduates, which has passed its second reading, has sparked mixed reactions among different cadres of the legal profession in Nigeria.

The proposal, which forms part of a broader amendment to the Legal Practitioners Act, 2004, would, if passed, require every newly called lawyer to undergo a two-year pupillage before commencing full legal practice.

Currently, Nigerian law graduates can commence full legal practice after attending the Nigerian Law School and being called to the Bar. However, if passed, the proposed bill, along with its other provisions, would alter this longstanding practice.

In conversations with law graduates and senior members of the legal profession, The Guardian found that the Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) and younger lawyers hold opposing views on the proposed two-year pupillage.

A law graduate who was called to the bar, Goodluck Enebeli, told The Guardian that he holds mixed feelings about the proposed pupillage. He said the requirement would prolong the time it takes for young lawyers to begin practising their chosen profession.

“Students spend a minimum of six years studying law at the undergraduate level. Some people spend more than that because of the ASUU strike.

“At law school, you spend a year and another 6 months for the results to be released and called to the bar. Introducing a two-year pupillage means that it would take about eight or nine years before one can practice law in Nigeria,” said Enebeli.

He argued that the pupillage requirement would be a waste of time for students and suggested that it be incorporated into the Nigerian Law School curriculum, with the duration extended to 18 months to provide students with a more comprehensive pupillage experience.

“The reason they are introducing this is that young lawyers graduates practice for about a year and a half, then proceed to establish their law practice. The reason they do that is because senior lawyers are not ready to pay young lawyers. It is unfair for young lawyers to earn N100,000 or N150,000 because they are young,” he added.

The Law Graduates Association of Nigeria ( LAWGAN ) agrees with his stance. In a statement released on December 24, the association’s President, Kayode Bello, opposed the proposed pupillage. According to Bello, the proposed mandatory apprenticeship would result in unnecessary redundancy if not reformed and would place further financial and temporal burdens on law graduates.

A legal luminary, Olisa Agbakoba, however, shares an opposing view with Bello and Enebeli. In an interview with The Guardian, Agbakoba described the proposal as a welcome development, adding that new wigs require additional experience.

“It is a very good idea. Law students fresh out of law school, even though licensed to practice law straight away, still need practical hands-on experience under accredited senior lawyers to fully grasp the issues around law practice. In my close ot 50 year of experience, I suggest it will be a great idea to return to old practice where new lawyers frrsh out of law school are accredited to law firms for actual practical experience,” Agbakoba told The Guardian.

A lawyer and partner at CrestHall Attorneys, with almost a decade of experience in the legal profession, Adebare Akinwunmi agreed with Agbakoba.

Akinwunmi told The Guardian that if the mandatory two-year pupillage is properly structured, it has the potential to strengthen professionalism in the legal profession.

“The gap between academic training and real word legal practice remains a recurring concern, and a well designed pupillage system can help bridge that divide,” said Akinwunmi.

For the pupillage system to achieve its intended goals, Akinwunmi suggests introducing clear rules to guide it, thereby preventing senior members of the profession from abusing it.

“Without clear rules and enforceable safeguards, there is a risk that the programme could be abused by senior members of the profession. It is essential that the system does not devolve into a period of unpaid or underpaid servitude, or expose young lawyers to toxic and exploitative work environments,” Akinwunmi added.

He also recommended minimum required remuneration standards and structured learning outcomes as other mechanisms that will ensure the success of the proposed pupillage.

“If these safeguards are put in place and properly enforced, the two-year pupillage could mark a positive step towards producing better trained, more ethical and more practice-ready lawyers. Without them, however, the policy risks doing more harm than good,” Akinwunmi added.