A legal practitioner, Mike Chigozie Egbo, has dragged the Nigerian Bar Association, its President Afam Osigwe, the NBA Keffi Branch, and two of its officials before the High Court of Nasarawa State sitting in Akwanga, alleging breach of his fundamental rights and demanding ₦50 million in damages.

The suit, filed pursuant to the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009, challenges the applicant’s removal from the NBA Keffi Branch (Solid Bar) WhatsApp platform, which he claims was carried out unlawfully and without fair hearing.

According to the originating processes dated 15th April, 2026, the claimant contends that he was issued a 10-minute ultimatum to delete a message questioning a position attributed to the NBA President before being removed from the platform . He maintains that the message did not violate any known law or rule of the association but was rather a constructive contribution to ongoing discourse within the branch.

Egbo further alleges that his removal was executed by the branch leadership in concert with national officers of the association, without recourse to the appropriate disciplinary bodies, including the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), thereby breaching his rights to fair hearing, freedom of expression, and association.

The applicant is seeking several reliefs from the court, including declarations that his removal was unconstitutional, an order setting aside the decision, and a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from further infringing on his rights. He is also asking the court to compel his immediate reinstatement into the branch’s WhatsApp group .

In addition, the claimant is demanding N50 million as aggravated damages for the alleged continuous violation of his constitutional rights, alongside the cost of the action.

Court documents indicate that Egbo claims the actions of the respondents have deprived him of access to professional information, association activities, and interaction with colleagues, thereby affecting his legal practice and standing within the Bar .

As of the time of filing this report, no official response had been issued by the defendants. The case is expected to test the limits of administrative authority within professional bodies and the extent to which internal disciplinary measures must conform with constitutional safeguards.