Menu

When women leading legal institutions will no longer be news 10 Aug 2026

Four women have reached the pinnacle of Nigeria’s legal institutional landscape, with three of the four positions secured within the past two years. Hon. Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun serves as Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), a position made substantive on 30 September 2024. Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem presides over the Court of Appeal, having been sworn in in June 2020. Olugbemisola Odusote leads the Nigerian Law School, a tenure that began in January 2026. On 19 July 2026, Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya, SAN, was elected President of the Nigerian Bar Association, becoming only the second woman to hold that office in the association’s sixty-six-year history. 

The headlines have been celebratory, and understandably so. By any honest assessment, this is a remarkable confluence of appointments and an election. The entire country should acknowledge it.

But acknowledgement and interrogation are not mutually exclusive. In fact, one of the more reliable signs of institutional maturity is the capacity to hold both simultaneously – recognising genuine progress while, in the same breath, asking what that progress actually means. Thus, while the celebratory sentiment is warranted, the analysis that follows must be braver. The same week that Badejo-Okusanya was elected NBA President, the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC) elevated sixty-eight lawyers to the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria. Of those, four were women and sixty-four were men. The celebrations and the data sit in uncomfortable proximity, and that juxtaposition is precisely what demands our attention.

Nigeria is not alone in confronting this tension. Across Africa, women have been reaching the legal summit with growing frequency. Kenya’s Martha Koome serves as Chief Justice (the country’s first woman to hold that position) and has become a continental reference point for judicial reform and gender advocacy on the bench. In May 2026, Justice Elizabeth Chiedza Gwaunza became Zimbabwe’s first female Chief Justice, a moment observers described as defining not only for Zimbabwe but also for the region. 

South Africa appointed Mandisa Maya as its first female Deputy Chief Justice in 2022 and as its first female Chief Justice in 2024, and has since continued to diversify both the Constitutional Court and the senior ranks of its commercial bar. Sudan, Ethiopia, and several other African jurisdictions have made similar appointments at the highest levels of the judiciary. The continent, in other words, is producing women capable of leading its most consequential legal institutions.

What the continent has been less successful at producing are the structural conditions that would make the appointment of those women unremarkable. And that distinction – between the remarkable appointment and the unremarkable one – is the real measure of whether a profession and a society have changed or are merely performing change.

Consider what Dr Odusote’s appointment tells us when read carefully. She is the first female Director-General of the Nigerian Law School since its establishment in 1962. The Law School is not a peripheral body. It is the statutory gatekeeper of the Nigerian legal profession. Every lawyer practising in Nigeria today passed through its doors. Its leadership shapes the culture of legal education, the standards of professional formation, and the pipeline through which lawyers enter and advance in the profession. Dr Odusote, by all accounts, is eminently qualified. She joined the Law School as a lecturer in 2001, served as Head of Academics, then as Deputy Director-General, before assuming the top role. Her appointment was earned, not conferred as a gesture.

But the sixty-four years between 1962 and 2026 are not a testament to patience. They constitute an institutional record that demands explanation, and the explanation is not flattering. Across six decades, through multiple administrations and successive cohorts of qualified female legal academics, the Nigerian Law School did not produce, or the appointing authorities did not select, a woman capable of leading it. The correct response to that record is not simply to celebrate its end. It is to examine what produced it and to ensure that the conditions that sustained it for sixty-four years are not still quietly in place.

This is the “firsts” problem. An institution that has structurally marginalised women eventually, through sustained individual excellence and shifting social expectations, produces a female leader capable of breaking through. The breakthrough is celebrated. The institution’s image is refreshed. The narrative of progress is updated. And then, having performed change at the symbolic level, the institution returns to its ordinary operations, which have not, in any structural sense, been altered by the appointment. The next woman to break through may need to wait another decade or even another generation.

Let’s use the latest celebration as a case study to illustrate this pattern. Priscilla Kuye led the NBA between 1991 and 1992. Thirty-four years later, another woman was elected NBA President. The gap between Priscilla Kuye and Oyinkansola Badejo-Okusanya is not merely a gap between two women. It speaks to the institutional conditions that governed the NBA over three and a half decades. A question worth asking is whether those conditions have changed.

The SAN rank is the sharpest illustration of where structural change has not kept pace with headline appointments. Women constitute approximately forty per cent of Nigeria’s legal profession. They now lead its four most significant institutions. Yet they represent fewer than five per cent of the SAN population. In the July 2025 conferment, fifty-seven practitioners received the rank of SAN. Two were women. In the July 2026 conferment, sixty-eight were elevated. Four were women. The trajectory is not a crisis; it is an improvement. But the numbers remain dramatically inconsistent with women’s representation in the profession as a whole, and that inconsistency is not accidental. It reflects the cumulative effect of criteria that include years of continuous court appearances, the volume of reported cases, and peer assessments conducted within networks that have historically been male-dominated.

The International Bar Association’s research into gender disparity in law, including its specific findings on Nigeria and its broader Raising the Bar report launched in March 2026, draws a consistent conclusion across jurisdictions. The problem is not a shortage of qualified women. It is the design of the systems that assess qualification and determine advancement. Those systems, built over generations in which the default practitioner was assumed to be male, measure the outputs of male professional trajectories. They disadvantage not because they are explicitly hostile to women, but because they are implicitly calibrated to someone else’s experience of a legal career.

The jurisdictions making the most meaningful progress are those that have moved from recognising this to acting on it. In the United Kingdom, for example, the Solicitors Regulation Authority has embedded equality, diversity, and inclusion obligations in its Code of Conduct, creating regulatory accountability for what was previously a matter of voluntary institutional preference. The challenge is moving from celebrating firsts to building the conditions that produce seconds, thirds, and eventually the unremarkable appointment of qualified women as a matter of institutional routine. That move – from the exceptional to the ordinary – is what Nigeria’s legal profession, and several other formal industries, must now make. What would making that move actually require? 

First, every institution that appoints a woman to its highest office for the first time must treat that appointment as the start of an audit, not the conclusion of one. The question her arrival makes unavoidable is how the period before her was organised, and whether the processes for identifying, mentoring, and advancing talent were designed to systematically produce male outcomes. If those processes are not reviewed while the institutional history is still visible, the opportunity will have passed.

Second, institutions must examine whether their criteria for recognising excellence measure talent or the outputs of careers built without interruption within networks that have historically excluded women. Where the proportion of women entering a profession dramatically outpaces the proportion reaching its highest distinctions, the profession's meritocratic self-image deserves honest scrutiny.

Third, institutions must resist the tendency to celebrate diversity at the summit while leaving the base undisturbed. A body that elects a female leader while its branches, chapters, or regional structures remain overwhelmingly male has achieved change only at the level that is most visible and least costly. The measure of genuine progress is not what the top looks like. It is what the middle looks like, because the middle is where the next generation of leaders is either developed or lost.

The four women now leading Nigeria’s legal institutions are, by any standard, remarkable. Their achievements deserve to be named and acknowledged without qualification. But the profession they lead is asking of them something beyond individual excellence. It is asking them to be among the last generation of women in Nigerian law for whom the word “first” is routinely attached to their names. That would be the achievement worth celebrating. Not the firsts themselves, but the institutions they leave behind – institutions reformed, open, and designed so that their successors inherit a profession in which being a woman and being a leader are not, in any meaningful sense, news.

Funmilayo Odude is a Partner at Commercial and Energy Law Practice (CANDELP).