The NBA Must Decide Whether It Wants Relevance or Respectability
By Haroon Aremu
The Nigerian Bar Association’s recent choices have forced an uncomfortable question: when a professional institution opens its doors to controversial voices, is it surrendering its standards or finally listening to the society it claims to serve? The NBA’s 66th Annual General Conference in Port Harcourt was meant to focus on the legal profession—its future, responsibilities and challenges in a rapidly changing Nigeria. Instead, one name overshadowed the entire gathering: Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan.
Before VDM even took the microphone, the argument had already begun. Why was he invited? What qualification earned him a seat on a panel of lawyers and security experts? Had the NBA abandoned professionalism? Or was the outrage exposing something deeper about Nigeria’s professional institutions? Social media commentators described the development in almost apocalyptic terms, questioning whether the legal profession could recover its lost glory and suggesting that the Bar was descending from seriousness into spectacle. The criticism was not merely about VDM; it was about leadership.
One commentator argued that perhaps the environment itself had changed. The older generation, he said, created a society that compelled Generation Z and Generation Alpha to adapt differently. And if enforcement and judicial institutions cannot make the justice system work as expected, figures like VDM will inevitably emerge as alternative avenues through which citizens express frustration. That argument is uncomfortable, but it deserves attention. VDM did not create distrust in institutions; he discovered an audience inside it.
Another commentator raised an even more serious concern: if someone publicly associated with strong allegations and confrontational commentary is given a platform inside one of Nigeria’s most important professional institutions, where exactly should the line be drawn? The issue was not simply that VDM is not a lawyer; it was about institutional credibility. One observer wondered whether allegations made publicly could eventually become relevant to criminal proceedings, raising the possibility that the NBA’s platforming of such commentary could create complications for the profession. Another went as far as suggesting that “winding up” the Bar might be the only way to save its reputation. The language was extreme, but extreme language often signals extreme frustration. And that frustration should not be dismissed as an attack on VDM. It should force the NBA to ask itself a deeper question: what exactly is the purpose of a professional institution in a changing society?
Read Also:
The controversy did not end there. What was expected to be a professional gathering of lawyers also featured presidential aspirants in what increasingly resembled a political debate, with clashes involving Omoyele Sowore, Rotimi Amaechi, Peter Obi and others. For critics, the scenes reinforced concerns that the NBA was losing the professional character expected of its conference. Then came the VDM saga. Despite the backlash, he appeared at the conference and participated in a plenary session titled “Known Gunmen or Unknown Gunmen,” sharing his experiences documenting insecurity and visiting affected communities. His defence was simple: he was not invited to teach lawyers law, but to speak from his experience on insecurity. That distinction matters, whether one agrees with his methods or not.
A professional association is not a random social‑media platform; it carries standards, traditions and a duty to protect the integrity of its profession. That concern intensified when some lawyers questioned why a social‑media personality was given a platform at a major legal conference, with SAN Femi Falana among those calling for proven experts. Others defended the invitation, arguing that VDM’s experience and advocacy on insecurity offered a perspective worth hearing.
The controversy cannot be reduced to “lawyers hate VDM.” It reflects a deeper shift in how authority is created in Nigeria. Traditionally, authority came through qualification, institution, experience and recognition. Today, visibility, audience and influence can create a different kind of power. VDM represents this new reality: while he lacks the conventional credentials of the Bar, his reach and ability to command public attention have given him considerable influence. The real disruption is that someone without institutional authority can sometimes wield greater public influence than those who possess it.
But should VDM be blamed for the wider crisis? Not entirely. He did not create public distrust in institutions, judicial delays, professional misconduct or the growing distance between citizens and authority. He operates within the space those failures created. Yet influence comes with responsibility. Public allegations require evidence, criticism must not become reckless accusation, and accountability cannot become trial by social media. The question is not simply whether VDM is right or wrong, but whether both the messenger and the institutions he challenges are willing to accept responsibility for the power they wield.
The deeper issue is the system itself. If traditional institutions remain credible and relevant, why are young Nigerians increasingly turning to influencers and online commentators for answers on justice, corruption, insecurity and accountability? Perhaps the problem is not that VDM has become powerful, but that traditional institutions have become distant. When institutions leave a vacuum, someone else eventually fills it.
Critics see the NBA’s engagement with controversial figures as a drift toward spectacle, while others view it as an attempt to connect with a changing society. Either way, without clear context, engagement can be mistaken for endorsement, putting the Bar’s credibility at risk. The real failure would be learning nothing. The VDM controversy exposed a deeper clash between institutional and popular authority, challenging the NBA to communicate better, listen more, uphold standards and rebuild public trust.
Haroon Aremu is a strategic communicator. He wrote in via [email protected].
