Falana under fire as Wike’s aide mocks, questions his SAN credentials

By Ukpono Ukpong

Prominent rights lawyer, Femi Falana, has come under intense fire as the FCT Minister’s Spokesperson, Lere Olayinka, had questioned Falana’s professional track record and mocked his elevation to the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

Olayinka in a statement issued yesterday described Falana as a self-appointed activist whose contributions to the legal profession remain negligible, even as he challenged him to name the landmark cases he has won or any developmental impact he has made in the legal field.

While mocking Falana’s perceived legal superiority, Olayinka defended Wike’s recent membership of the Body of Benchers, asserting that the FCT Minister earned the appointment based on merit and significant contributions to legal education in Nigeria.

“It is funny and ridiculous that in the mind of Falana, only those who have handled cases in trial court or appellate court are lawyers, and that a lawyer must have handled cases in trial or appellate court to be qualified for appointment as a Life Bencher.

READ ALSO: APC National Chairman inaugurates France chapter, drums supports for Tinubu

“Apart from going on television to make noise, what has Falana contributed to the legal profession? Even the SAN that he got, was it not an afterthought? Was it not years after his mates had gotten SAN?”

Highlighting Wike’s achievements, Olayinka recalled his role as Governor of Rivers State in developing key legal institutions.

“As Governor of Rivers State, Wike, was instrumental to the establishment and infrastructural development of the campus of the Nigerian Law School in Port Harcourt, which is the best centre for legal education in Nigeria today,” Olayinka said.

He noted Wike’s similar contributions to the Yenagoa campus, including the construction of a 1,500-capacity hall and gender-specific hostels.

Continuing, Olayinka stated that Wike, now as FCT Minister, is currently constructing a 10-unit residential quarters for the Nigerian Law School in Bwari, Abuja, and has also provided operational vehicles for the institution to enhance its efficiency.

He questioned Falana’s legacy by asking, “The question is; what has Falana done for the legal profession? Even in Ekiti State, where he is from, he has not contributed anything.”

To buttress his point, Olayinka drew comparisons with other senior lawyers from Ekiti.

“The Bar Center in Ado Ekiti was built by Aare Afe Babalola (SAN) while the one in Ikere Ekiti was built by Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN). Also, Aare Afe Babalola has been sponsoring Nigerian Bar Association annual lecture for years and has been assisting lawyers in Ekiti with medical treatments in his Ado Ekiti teaching hospital. What has Falana done? Nothing!” he declared.

He also ridiculed Falana’s political ambition, recalling his unsuccessful bid to become governor of Ekiti State.

“Did Falana not fail as a politician when he went to Ekiti to contest for governor and failed woefully?” Olayinka stated.

Taking aim at Falana’s legal commentary, Olayinka accused him of deliberately misleading the public on the Supreme Court’s ruling concerning the Rivers State House of Assembly.

“Falana lied on national television by saying that the Supreme Court judgment on Rivers State ‘had nothing to do with who is the authentic Speaker of the House’ when the issue of defection of the 27 members of the House of Assembly was determined by the Supreme Court.”

He added that Justice Emmanuel Obile of the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt dismissed a suit filed by the Labour Party on the basis of the Supreme Court’s ruling, which had finalized the defection issue.

“But Falana went on television to lie and deceive his client that the Supreme Court didn’t rule on the defection.

“The same Falana said three members of the Rivers State House of Assembly can carry out legislative functions despite the provision of Section 96 (1) of the 1999 Constitution that ‘The quorum of a House of Assembly shall be one-third of all the members of the House.’ If as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, you could tell your client that Section 96 (1) of the Constitution of Nigeria is useless and in a House of Assembly of 32 members, three can sit, questions need to be asked as to how exactly you qualified as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria,” Olayinka said.