The Nigerian Law Society (NLS) has challenged the directive of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, ordering lawyers to stop using the title “Barrister” and adopt “Esquire” instead.
The society argued that the directive lacked a clear legal foundation under the laws regulating the Nigerian legal profession.
The CJN had directed lawyers and court officials at the Supreme Court to discontinue the use of “Barrister” before their names in official engagements.
The directive was contained in a July 13, 2026 memo signed by the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court, Kabir Akanbi, and addressed to legal practitioners, court registrars and other lawyers.
The NLS, however, said the Legal Practitioners Act, 1962 recognises “Barrister” and “Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria” as professional descriptions for lawyers called to the Nigerian Bar.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, NLS Executive Director, Dr Tonye Jaja, acknowledged that “Barrister” alone may not constitute the complete professional title but argued that “Esquire” also has no express statutory recognition.
“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.
He argued that neither the CJN, the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) nor the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) could impose professional requirements that were not provided for by law.
The NLS also accused the CJN and LPPC of applying inconsistent standards in the treatment of professional titles, citing the controversy surrounding the “Blue Silks” designation of Senior Counsel of Nigeria (SCN).
Jaja faulted arguments that the SCN title should not be recognised because it is not expressly provided for in the Legal Practitioners Act, noting that the absence of a title from legislation does not automatically make its use unlawful.
He maintained that the controversy should be resolved through a consistent interpretation and application of existing laws, rather than restricting one professional title while endorsing another that is also not expressly provided for in the relevant legislation.
