Lawyers under the Nigerian Bar Association in the Abeokuta, Sagamu and Ota branches on Monday began a three-day boycott of court proceedings in protest against policies introduced by the Ogun State Judiciary, including a ₦100,000 charge for virtual court hearings.
The Punch reported that the action affected proceedings at the Magistrates’ and High Courts in Abeokuta, where lawyers stayed away from court in compliance with the directive.
Addressing journalists after monitoring compliance, the Chairman of the NBA Abeokuta Branch, Chief Kayode Aderemi, said the boycott followed unsuccessful efforts by the association to persuade the judiciary to review the disputed policies.
According to him, the lawyers are protesting the introduction of a ₦100,000 fee for each virtual hearing, increased charges for oath administration and restrictions on the number of witness oaths lawyers can process daily.
Aderemi said, “We are here today because members of our branch, by resolution at our branch meeting, resolved to embark on a three-day court boycott, beginning today, 6th July 2026, through 8th July 2026. The boycott is in protest against certain policies of the Ogun State Judiciary which we believe are inimical to the interests of our members.
“Some of these policies include the payment of a ₦100,000 virtual hearing fee. This means that any litigant who wishes to have a matter heard virtually must pay ₦100,000 for each virtual session. There is also the increase in the oath administration fee from ₦200 to over ₦1,500. Our clients have complained about this increase, and it has also affected legal practitioners, who are constantly being questioned by their clients.
“Thirdly, there is the issue of restrictions placed on lawyers. As it stands today, lawyers cannot process more than four witness oaths in a single day. The question then is: if I have 15 or more witnesses in a case, what happens? We believe this policy unjustifiably limits the ability of lawyers to carry out their professional duties. These and other related issues are the reasons we have declared this court boycott.”
He noted that the association had exhausted all available channels of engagement with the judiciary but said none of the concerns raised had been addressed.
He said, “For instance, we have written formally as a branch. Other NBA branches in Ogun State have also written on these issues.
“Beyond that, we have raised these concerns during the Bar and Bench meetings, where branch chairmen, branch secretaries, administrative judges and the Chief Judge are all present. We have discussed these matters repeatedly.
“In addition, respected senior members of the Bar have approached Their Lordships in an effort to resolve these issues. Unfortunately, all these efforts have proved unsuccessful.”
Aderemi added that the industrial action was jointly observed by the Abeokuta, Ota and Sagamu branches of the NBA and described compliance as impressive.
Responding to the development, the Chief Registrar of the Ogun State High Court, Mr Olakulehin Oke, said the judiciary had not received any formal notification from the NBA concerning the boycott.
He explained that the judiciary only became aware of the action through reports circulating on social media.
Oke said, “Officially, we have not been informed. As I speak, there has been no official communication from any branch of the Nigerian Bar Association notifying us of any court boycott. We became aware of the boycott the same way many others did—through social media.”
On the controversial ₦100,000 virtual hearing charge, Oke maintained that the provision was part of the High Court of Ogun State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2024, which he said was developed after consultations with NBA branches across the state.
According to him, draft copies of the rules were distributed to all five NBA branches before implementation, but only one branch responded by identifying typographical errors.
He further stated that virtual hearings remained optional and were introduced to complement physical court sittings by improving access to justice.
“Technology comes with costs. Establishing, maintaining and operating virtual court facilities requires significant investment. Since the introduction of these provisions, virtual courtrooms have been installed in nine of the 11 judicial divisions in Ogun State, and more than 600 virtual hearings have been successfully conducted,” he said.
Oke added that witnesses had participated in virtual proceedings from countries including Australia, Canada and the United States, eliminating the need for costly international travel.
Defending the increase in affidavit-related charges, he said the review formed part of the judiciary’s digitalisation initiative through the OgunComis electronic affidavit platform.
He explained that the platform was introduced to eliminate forgery, discourage cash transactions and improve the verification of affidavits, noting that similar systems were already in use in Oyo, Ondo, Rivers, Lagos and the Federal Capital Territory.
Clarifying the issue of affidavit restrictions, Oke said the limitation only applied to general affidavits and not to affidavits filed in connection with court proceedings.
“There are two categories of affidavits. Court process affidavits, which include witness statements on oath and affidavits connected with pending cases, have no restriction whatsoever.
“The limitation applies only to general affidavits such as change of name, declaration of age and loss of documents. The policy was introduced to curb abuse, reduce fraudulent activities and enhance security,” he said.
Describing the boycott as unfortunate, the Chief Registrar said discussions on the disputed policies were still ongoing through the judiciary’s Bar and Bench Forum.
“The last meeting was held last month. Some of these issues were raised, and we had conversations around them with the chairmen and secretaries of the five NBA branches. For us to now wake up and see the press releases without any official communication with the judiciary smacks of an ambush.
“The legal profession is a profession of ethics and protocols. The Bar and the Bench are partners in the administration of justice, and where there are disagreements, we should always sit down and resolve them through dialogue,” Oke said.
