Prominent rights lawyer and former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, has challenged claims by former NBA General Secretary, Olumuyiwa Akinboro, SAN, criticising the recent requirement for newly cleared Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) to undergo security screening by the Department of State Services (DSS).

Odinkalu emphasised that the rule mandating such screenings was not new and was instituted in 2022 by former Chief Justice Olukayode Ariwoola and governed SAN conferment in 2022, 2023, and 2024 without objection.

According to him, Akinboro’s assertion that SAN elevation is solely a professional recognition and immune from security oversight is “factually inaccurate.”

In a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter), Odinkalu said: “These people are short of candour. The rules requiring screening of SAN candidates by DSS, EFCC, and ICPC were made by Olukayode Ariwoola in 2022. They governed SAN conferment in 2022, 2023, and 2024. Rather than object, folks saw them and applied.”

He also highlighted what he called a double standard, noting that judicial nominees similarly undergo DSS screening. He questioned why only the screening of SAN candidates was being contested, asking: “Why are they objecting to the screening of SAN candidates by SSS? What do they have to hide?”

Odinkalu further stressed that claims of the legal profession’s independence in Nigeria were largely aspirational, pointing out that statutory regulatory bodies, including the General Council of the Bar, the Council of Legal Education, the Body of Benchers, the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, and the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee, are government-regulated with built-in majorities.

“The Nigerian Bar Association is an NGO with statutory privileges,” Odinkalu said, calling for a truly independent Bar.

“Those who enjoy the privilege of a parastatalised Bar should not mislead the public when they know better. It’s dishonest.’’

Akinboro had strongly criticised the decision requiring newly cleared SANs to undergo DSS screening.

In a statement issued on Monday, Akinboro had described the move as an intrusion into the independence of the legal profession, stressing that the conferment of the SAN rank was not a political appointment or an executive privilege, but a professional recognition governed strictly by the Legal Practitioners Act and administered by the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC).

He maintained that subjecting SAN designates to additional external vetting after the LPPC had already carried out rigorous scrutiny would undermine due process and could erode the sanctity of the profession.