The Federal Capital Territory High Court has dismissed a lawsuit brought against the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) by one of its former general secretary, Hon Nimi Walson-Jack. The court’s decision offers crucial insights into the legal boundaries surrounding membership privileges and the internal affairs of professional associations.

The case, FCT/HC/CV/2534/2023, centered on Walson-Jack’s challenge to the NBA’s decision to revoke his attendance privileges at the association’s National Executive Committee (NEC) meetings. The court’s ruling upheld the NBA’s authority to manage its internal affairs and govern membership privileges according to its constitution.

The court first addressed a preliminary objection raised by the NBA, which sought to examine substantive issues prematurely. The court dismissed the objection, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of the facts and pleadings before adjudicating on the merits of the case.

In assessing the substantive suit, the court underscored that in declaratory relief cases, the claimant bears the burden of proof and cannot rely solely on the defendant’s weaknesses. Significantly, the court noted that Walson-Jack failed to provide evidence of his legal qualification and tenure as NBA General Secretary, raising doubts about his standing to bring the suit.

The court delved into the crux of the matter, affirming that while association membership is voluntary, individuals are bound by the association’s rules once they opt-in. It emphasized that judicial intervention in internal association matters is warranted only in cases of constitutional breaches by the association.

In this case, the court ruled that the NBA had conferred the privilege of attending NEC meetings upon Walson-Jack but also had the authority to revoke that privilege due to his association with a rival organization, which conflicted with his allegiance to the NBA.

The court’s ruling resolved all questions in favor of the NBA and dismissed all reliefs sought by Walson-Jack. This decision carries significant legal implications, setting a precedent for interpreting membership privileges within professional associations and limiting judicial intervention in association matters.