I am not surprise on the response of Inebehe Effiong, Esq. on the NBA President tweet on Firdaus Hijab saga. my good friend Effiong succeeded in speaking grammar rather addresing the substance of the case.

Apparently, he had displayed his academic bigotry, selfishness, sentiment and hypocritic approach on the issue simply because the victim is a Muslim and the subject matter is Hijab.

May I remind him that he was at the forefront to advocate and support the action of a Man that name his dog ‘Buhari’ sometimes ago in the name of human rights crusade, but turn swiftly against a woman that chooses to exercise her fundamental right as enshrined under the constitution simply because she is a Muslim. This purely an academic bigotry. Any criticism against Firdaus’s right is an act of Terrorist. You know what I mean, Mr. Effiong.

Whether the NBA President’s daughter graduated from New York or American Legal system is different from Nigeria Legal system, or they don’t wear gown and wig etc. This is far from the present issue.

Let me assist you in case you are too sentimental to appreciate it. The issues are:

Whether by the provision of section 38 of the 1999 constitution, Firdaus has the right to wear hijab/headscarf to call to the bar ceremony? Whether the action of CLE/BoB by their refusal to call firdaus to the bar violates her constitutional right of freedom of religion? Whether CLE/BoB action is constitutional?

The above is what you and your likes minds should focus on not academic bigotry and hypocrisy.

On the NBA President tweet, let me make it clear for the record, I did not voted for A.B. Mahmoud, SAN in the 2015 NBA Election but my Boss J.K. Gadzama, SAN. We are not in the same political arena. I guess you understand the angle I am coming from.

Back to his tweet, he has the right to express his view on this issue and no law denied him of such right. Your opinion like Silas Onu is more of political than law. You have not make any submission on point of law, this because you and your bigotal allies have none.

One can easily dictate it from your language dictions and tone. Where is you respect for the Profession which you claimed to be defending against Firdaus. Where is the Ethics in you. I mean the use of derogatory and unprofessional statement. Sorry, I forget the NBA President is also a Muslim. Right? Is an unfortunate, Mr. Selective Human Rights Activist.

I quote you ‘Hijab is not ordinarily permissible during our call to Bar’. This exposes you sentiment and bigotry in an arena of human rights crusade. So you don’t have anything tangible evidence to support or justify the action of the Body of Benchers. No Law, No Judicial pronouncement, No Rules, No, No, No and No.

Is a pity that you acknowledged her right but end up saying is not absolute. Kindly tell us the circumstance where Firdaus right is not absolute. Give me the law Mista. But don’t cite section 45 of the constitution for me because is totally not applicable.

Your submission on section 10 of the constitution is mischievous and deliberate attempt to mislead the feeble minds. Nigeria is not a Secular State.

Finally, I am yet to see any contrary decision against the plethora cases on Hijab. Why are you running away from those cases. I notice you are not the only one on this but all your likes minds.

Please next time give us meat not bone. Thank you.

Abu Ruqayyah. aburuqayyah66@gmail.com