The Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Benjamin Kalu, has formally challenged the authority of the Council of Legal Education (CLE) to revoke his qualifying certificate from the Nigerian Law School.
In a firm rebuttal to a petition seeking the withdrawal of his certificate over alleged inconsistencies surrounding the timing of his National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) and law school studies, Kalu’s legal team described the complaint as “fundamentally deficient in law” and urged the council to dismiss it immediately.
The development marks a significant escalation in a dispute that has raised fundamental questions about the scope of the CLE’s disciplinary powers.
Kalu’s Legal Arguments
In a letter dated April 28, 2026, signed by Chukwuebuka S. Okeke of Olaniwun Ajayi LP Chambers, Kalu’s lawyers advanced two primary arguments.
First, they maintained that no law, regulation, or binding institutional rule in force at the time prohibited a student from concurrently participating in the Nigerian Law School programme and the NYSC. A review of the Nigerian Law School Student Handbook for the 2010/2011 academic session, they noted, revealed no express ban on students serving in the corps while enrolled.
Second, and more critically, they argued that the CLE lacks “express statutory power” to retroactively withdraw or cancel a qualifying certificate. The lawyers contended that the council’s disciplinary powers are “implied and necessarily narrow,” applying only in cases of “manifest vitiating criminal conduct” — and asserted that “no such conduct has been established against Kalu.”
The Petition’s Allegations
The CLE had, on April 21, 2026, directed Kalu to submit a written response within seven days to aid a probe by a three-member committee. The allegations against the Deputy Speaker include claimed perjury, false representation, and contradictions between his NYSC and Bar certificates.
A separate petition from the Civil Society Groups of Good Governance (CSGGG) further argued that law students were expected to declare that they were not participating in NYSC during their course of study. Kalu’s lawyers, however, dismissed the declaration relied upon by the petitioner as unsworn, stating that it “carries no force of law.” They added that formal criminal proceedings would be a precondition for the council to act on grounds of criminal conduct — and none have been established.
Notably, Kalu’s legal team neither admitted nor denied the claim that he attended Law School and served in the NYSC simultaneously. Instead, they maintained that even if he did, the concurrent participation carries “no legal consequence” under existing statutes.
The CLE’s Position and Jurisdictional Question
The Council of Legal Education is not the body responsible for disciplining practising lawyers. Its statutory mandate, as outlined in the Legal Education (Consolidation, etc.) Act, is to determine whether someone has met the required training standards to be called to the Bar.
Section 1(1)–(2) of the Act stipulates that “The Council shall have responsibility for the legal education of persons seeking to become members of the legal profession.” Section 5 states that a person shall be entitled to a qualifying certificate if they are a Nigerian citizen and have successfully completed a course of practical training at the Nigerian Law School lasting for a period fixed by the Council as an academic year.
The CLE’s decision to set up a three-member committee to investigate the petition suggests the council believes it possesses jurisdiction over the matter. However, Kalu’s lawyers have directly challenged that assumption, arguing that no provision in the Legal Education Act or the Legal Practitioners Act disqualifies a person from undertaking the Law School programme by reason of simultaneous NYSC service.
CLE Declines Public Comment
The council has so far declined to discuss the matter publicly. Its Secretary and Director of Administration, Ms. Aderonke O. Osho, confirmed to The Whistler that the letter was sent to Kalu but said the probe would be handled privately.
“We wrote a letter to him. We did not copy any media agency or the press,” she said. “We’ll be dealing with him, and I can confirm that we wrote the letter, but we’ll only deal with him.”
Asked whether Kalu had responded after the deadline elapsed, Osho said: “Right now, I’m not in a position to say whether he has responded or not.”
What’s at Stake
The outcome of the dispute will likely turn on a narrow but significant legal question: Does the Council of Legal Education possess retroactive power to withdraw a qualifying certificate for alleged conduct — specifically, concurrent NYSC and Law School attendance — that no statute expressly prohibited at the time?
Kalu’s legal team has made clear their position. “Neither the LEA nor the LPA contain any provision that disqualifies a person from undertaking or completing the Nigerian Law School programme by reason of simultaneous NYSC service,” they stated.
Discussion about this post