DRAMA AT OWERRI BAR AS 215 LAWYERS IMPEACH PROF. MAZI UDEGBULEM OVER ₦100 MILLION CONTROVERSY; ACTING CHAIRMAN SWORN IN
Four-month-old administration swept aside after stormy Extraordinary General Meeting; investigative panel alleges questionable transactions involving ₦34 million and a separate ₦30 million; Udegbulem had earlier denied wrongdoing.
What began as a disagreement over the management of a ₦100 million government donation has culminated in a dramatic leadership upheaval at the Owerri Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), with members voting to remove their Chairman, Prof. Mazi Udegbulem, barely four months after he assumed office.
In a development that has sent shockwaves through the legal community in Imo State, 215 members of the Branch reportedly voted unanimously for Udegbulem’s removal at an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) held on Tuesday, November 10, 2026, at the NBA Bar Centre, Owerri.
Not a single dissenting vote was recorded, according to an account of the proceedings circulated by members.
The dramatic conclusion to the protracted leadership crisis came after weeks of bitter disagreements, competing investigative committees, multiple court actions, allegations of financial impropriety, disrupted meetings and an increasingly fractured Branch leadership.
By Wednesday morning, November 11, the leadership transition had moved beyond resolutions on paper, as the Branch Vice Chairman, Dr. Ekezie Onumajulu, was sworn in as Acting Chairman. His oath of office was administered by former Branch Chairman and Notary Public, Nze J. I. Ogamba.
Under the applicable NBA Uniform Bye-Laws, the Acting Chairman is expected to serve for three months.
THE ₦100 MILLION THAT IGNITED THE CRISIS
At the heart of the unfolding drama is a ₦100 million financial donation reportedly approved by the Imo State Government under Governor Hope Uzodimma in August 2026 to facilitate the participation and movement of NBA Owerri members to the Association’s Annual General Conference (AGC) in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.
The donation, credited to the Branch’s Fidelity Bank account on August 24, 2026, reportedly formed part of a larger ₦350 million financial support package distributed among six NBA branches in Imo State.
While Owerri received ₦100 million, five other branches reportedly received ₦50 million each.
Trouble began when members started demanding explanations concerning the application, expenditure and authorisation of the funds.
Questions were raised about payments made shortly after the money entered the Branch’s account, the procurement of facilities and equipment, conference logistics and whether the expenditures had received the necessary approval of the General Meeting.
The disagreement soon evolved into a full-blown leadership crisis.
NOTICE OF REMOVAL AND THE FIRST INVESTIGATIVE CONTROVERSY
Following the September 26, 2026 Monthly General Meeting, members served Udegbulem with a formal Notice of Removal on September 28.
At the September meeting, the Chairman reportedly constituted a five-member committee to investigate the allegations surrounding his administration.
The arrangement immediately attracted objections from members, who questioned the propriety of allowing a Chairman facing allegations to constitute an investigative committee to examine matters involving his own administration.
The principle of nemo judex in causa sua — that no person should be a judge in his own cause — became one of the central arguments in the escalating dispute.
Dissatisfied with the development, 183 members of the Branch, coordinated by Chinedu Agu, requisitioned an Extraordinary General Meeting initially scheduled for October 10.
That meeting, however, could not hold as planned. Members alleged that the Bar Centre was locked and police officers were deployed to prevent access to the premises.
The requisitionists subsequently rescheduled the meeting for October 15.
NBA PRESIDENT INTERVENES AS CRISIS REACHES NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
With the dispute threatening to destabilise the Branch, the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Mrs. Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, intervened.
Following correspondence from Udegbulem seeking intervention, the NBA President directed that the October 15 meeting should proceed.
She also constituted a three-member national investigative committee comprising NBA General Secretary Afam Okeke, Third Vice-President Iniobong Irene Pepple and NBA Treasurer Esther Jimoh.
The committee was mandated to investigate the receipt, management and disbursement of the ₦100 million donation and submit its findings and recommendations by October 30, 2026.
Importantly, the NBA President clarified that the constitution of the committee did not amount to a finding against any individual and that persons whose conduct might be questioned should be given an opportunity to respond.
At the October 15 meeting, members accepted the presence of the presidential committee but insisted on establishing an independent Branch investigative panel.
Consequently, the General Meeting dissolved the earlier committee constituted by Udegbulem and established a fresh five-member Investigation and Fact-Finding Committee chaired by Chidi B. Nworka.
Other members included F.C. Obinna, M. Chukwura Onuorah, Chima Ezike and Victoria C. Joshua, who served as Secretary.
The committee was mandated to investigate the application for, receipt, management and disbursement of the government donation.
FOUR COURT ACTIONS, TWO INVESTIGATIONS AND A BRANCH IN TURMOIL
Rather than ending the disagreement, the establishment of the Nworka-led committee opened another front in the crisis.
Udegbulem instituted separate legal proceedings at the Imo State High Court sitting at Aboh Mbaise and the Federal High Court, Owerri, seeking to restrain the committee from investigating him.
In one of the proceedings, the High Court reportedly declined to grant an ex parte restraining order and directed that the respondents be put on notice.
The Chairman also challenged the committee’s impartiality and questioned the propriety of having a parallel investigation while the NBA President’s own committee was conducting an inquiry.
The Nworka-led committee nevertheless proceeded with its assignment and concluded its investigation on October 31.
Meanwhile, the Branch’s October 31 General Meeting, at which the investigative report and the question of the Chairman’s removal were expected to feature, became another major flashpoint.
According to accounts circulated by members, Udegbulem had instituted another legal action seeking to prevent discussion of his removal after the matter appeared on the meeting’s circulated agenda.
The meeting subsequently descended into disorder.
Members alleged that the venue was populated by non-lawyers, students and suspected disruptive elements, resulting in heated exchanges and the silencing of members who attempted to discuss the Chairman’s removal and the investigative report.
Among those reportedly prevented from contributing was former Branch Chairman, Dec Madu.
The situation provoked a walkout by several senior members and former leaders of the Branch, including Chief Mike Ahamba, SAN; Emeka Nwagwu, SAN; Dec Madu; and former Secretary Willie Opara.
The meeting reportedly lasted barely 40 minutes, with several outstanding agenda items left unattended.
251 MEMBERS REQUISITION ANOTHER MEETING
Following the collapse of the October 31 meeting, the resistance to Udegbulem’s continued leadership gathered fresh momentum.
A total of 251 members reportedly requisitioned another Extraordinary General Meeting for November 10, 2026, at 2 p.m. at the NBA Bar Centre.
The requisition was coordinated by Chuks Agbugba and Chinedu Agu.
In another attempt to challenge the proposed meeting, Udegbulem reportedly instituted a fourth suit at the Federal High Court, Owerri, naming the two coordinators among the respondents.
But the legal action did not prevent members from assembling at the Bar Centre on November 10.
THE FINAL SHOWDOWN: 215 VOTES, ZERO DISSENT
The events of November 10 provided the defining moment of the crisis.
When members initially assembled, Udegbulem was reportedly not in the meeting hall, while only one member of the Branch Executive Committee, Publicity Secretary Chimere Okoronkwo, was present.
Emeka Nwagwu, SAN, identified as the most senior member of the Bar in attendance, moved a motion that Dec Madu should preside over the meeting, with Okoronkwo acting as Secretary.
However, as Madu approached the rostrum, Udegbulem reportedly emerged from his office, accompanied by some supporters, and insisted that the meeting could not proceed.
The intervention of four former Branch Chairmen — Emeka Nwagwu, SAN; Dec Madu; D. O. Nosike; and J. I. Ogamba — eventually restored calm.
They persuaded Udegbulem to preside over the meeting, explaining that Madu had only been nominated because members initially believed the Chairman was absent.
Udegbulem subsequently called the meeting to order.
In his opening remarks, he reportedly maintained that he had not convened the meeting because its propriety was already being challenged in court.
But the proceedings soon took an unexpected turn.
Chinedu Agu moved a motion calling on the Chairman to recuse himself to enable members to deliberate on his removal. The motion was supported by Ugonna Onuegbu.
Attempts to rule Agu out of order proved unsuccessful.
Agu subsequently moved a substantive motion for Udegbulem’s removal from office. The motion was seconded by Chukwuemeka Anyanwu and received overwhelming vocal support.
As tensions mounted, former Chairman L. U. N. Nwakaeti proposed voting by voice and a show of hands.
Following the initial show of hands, members agreed that the votes should be formally counted at the Hon. Justice P. C. Onumajulu Square.
What followed was the decisive moment.
At the Square, all 215 members reportedly voted in favour of the Chairman’s removal.
There was no vote against the motion.
In a further dramatic incident, Udegbulem allegedly grabbed and broke a microphone in an attempt to prevent the recording of the votes. Members reportedly resisted the move and recovered the damaged microphone.
The Chairman subsequently left the premises amid angry reactions from members.
His removal marked the culmination of a crisis that had paralysed the Branch for several weeks.
INVESTIGATIVE REPORT DELIVERS DAMNING ALLEGATIONS
With the removal motion carried, members proceeded to consider the report of the Nworka-led investigative committee.
The report, dated October 31, 2026, reportedly raised serious questions about the handling of the ₦100 million donation and identified transactions which the committee considered inadequately explained or unsupported by sufficient documentation.
Among its most significant findings were allegations concerning ₦34 million disbursed to five recipients on the same day the government donation entered the Branch’s bank account.
The report identified the beneficiaries as:
Ade Glory Food Empire — ₦4 million.
Chiemeka Elebiri — ₦12 million.
Daniella Obianuju Ohuabunwa — ₦10 million.
Kelechi Ogugbuajah — ₦2 million.
Chikaima Lilian Ugoanyanwu — ₦6 million.
The committee reportedly questioned the supporting documentation for several of these transactions and expressed concern about the inability of the Treasurer to satisfactorily explain some payments.
It also raised questions concerning approximately ₦42 million reportedly spent on Annual General Conference logistics, including discrepancies between the amounts initially identified and the expenditure subsequently presented.
Perhaps even more significantly, the report questioned a separate ₦30 million allegedly received by Udegbulem from the Imo State Government for the installation of solar panels and air-conditioning facilities at the Bar Centre.
The committee reportedly demanded an explanation regarding the disclosure and management of this additional amount.
The investigative panel recommended an independent professional audit of the Branch’s accounts and disciplinary proceedings against officers found responsible for the alleged irregularities.
The report reportedly indicted not only Udegbulem but also the Branch Treasurer, Olachi Madona Anosike, the Chairman of the Logistics Planning Committee and the Committee’s Alternate Chairman.
The General Meeting subsequently adopted the report.
However, a source reiterated that it was important to stress that these are allegations and investigative findings, not a final judicial determination of criminal liability.
UDEGBULEM’S DEFENCE: EVERY KOBO ACCOUNTED FOR
Before his removal, Udegbulem had publicly rejected allegations of financial misappropriation.
At a press conference held on October 19, 2026, at the Imo State Council of the Nigeria Union of Journalists complex in New Owerri, he maintained that the entire ₦100 million donation had been properly accounted for.
According to his explanation, the money was paid directly into the Branch’s official Fidelity Bank account and utilised for conference logistics, infrastructure, equipment and members’ welfare.
He disclosed that the Branch had an opening balance of approximately ₦6.35 million before the government donation, bringing the total available funds to approximately ₦106.35 million.
He further stated that approximately ₦87.43 million had been spent, leaving a balance of approximately ₦18.92 million as of October 15.
His expenditure breakdown included:
₦42.18 million for 2026 NBA AGC logistics.
₦17.5 million for solar power installation.
₦10.3 million in welfare payments to 206 lawyers.
Approximately ₦5.42 million for air-conditioning units.
₦3.4 million for health insurance enrolment.
Other expenditure on computers, printers, executive chairs, public-address equipment and repairs.
Udegbulem maintained that the expenditure was undertaken for the benefit of the Branch and its members, insisting that relevant financial records were available for verification.
He also expressed willingness to cooperate with any lawful investigation.
His defence, however, did not resolve the disagreement over the authorisation, documentation and propriety of the transactions.
The competing accounts of the expenditure have now become central to the demand for an independent professional audit.
BANKS, WHATSAPP PLATFORMS AND OTHER FAR-REACHING RESOLUTIONS
Following the adoption of the investigative report, members proceeded to
BANKS, WHATSAPP PLATFORMS AND OTHER FAR-REACHING RESOLUTIONS
Following the adoption of the investigative report, members proceeded to deliberate on further measures considered necessary to safeguard the financial interests, institutional integrity and administrative stability of the Branch.
The resolutions reportedly extended beyond the immediate question of leadership, reflecting the determination of members to ensure that the financial controversy surrounding the government donation would not end with the removal of the Chairman.
Central to the discussions was the need to establish a transparent financial accountability process, including an independent professional audit of the Branch’s accounts and transactions relating to the government donation.
Members also expressed concern about the need to preserve relevant financial records, supporting documents and other materials that could assist in determining the circumstances surrounding the disputed expenditures.
The question of access to the Branch’s banking records and the proper control of its financial accounts also assumed importance in the aftermath of the leadership change.
The controversy had exposed the importance of institutional safeguards, particularly the need to ensure that financial transactions undertaken in the name of the Branch are properly authorised, documented and reported to members.
The meeting also reportedly considered issues relating to the Branch’s digital communication platforms, including WhatsApp groups, which had become important channels for disseminating information, discussing the crisis and communicating official decisions.
The dispute had generated considerable tension across the Branch’s communication platforms, with competing positions and disagreements over the legitimacy of decisions taken by different factions.
Members’ concern was therefore not merely about who controlled the communication channels but also about restoring confidence in the Branch’s internal information systems and ensuring that official platforms served the collective interests of the Association.