Badejo-Okusanya Leads NBA Presidential Election

Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, has taken an early lead in the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) presidential election, raising the possibility of becoming the first woman to head the association if the current voting pattern continues.

Early figures released by the election committee at 11:33 a.m. on Saturday showed that Badejo-Okusanya had secured 4,860 votes, accounting for 41.77 per cent of the ballots counted.

Her closest rival, Lateef Omoyemi Akangbe (SAN), had received 3,851 votes, representing 33.10 per cent, while Aare Olumuyiwa Akinboro (SAN) followed with 2,924 votes, making up 25.13 per cent of the votes counted.

Although the final outcome had not been announced at the time of reporting, the early count of about 11,600 votes indicated that Badejo-Okusanya was ahead in the race.

The election comes a day after NBA President Afam Osigwe (SAN) rejected allegations that he was trying to influence the election or manipulate its outcome.

Speaking with journalists in Abuja on Friday, Osigwe said the Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association functions independently and does not take instructions from him or any member of the association’s leadership.

He also denied reports suggesting that he had endorsed or supported any particular candidate, describing the claims as politically driven and lacking proof.

The election has attracted controversy in recent weeks, with some presidential aspirants and stakeholders raising concerns about the credibility of the process.

Some of them had called for the election to be postponed, demanded compulsory National Identification Number verification for voters and accused the NBA leadership of attempting to interfere with the poll.

The association, however, maintained throughout the process that the Electoral Committee is the only body empowered by the NBA constitution to organise and conduct the election.

Osigwe also maintained that previous claims that NBA elections had been manipulated had never been proven before any court.

He further stated that his personal choice of candidate could not determine the outcome of the election, insisting that members alone would decide the winner through their votes.