A senior lawyer, Chief Joe Kyari Gadzama, has sued the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) at the Federal High Court, Abuja, challenging a three-year suspension imposed on him over alleged professional misconduct.

Gadzama commenced judicial review proceedings after the LPDC found him guilty of professional misconduct in connection with a long-running dispute over compensation for victims of the 2001 Zaki-Biam military operation in Benue State.

The Federal High Court has granted him leave to pursue the judicial review, paving the way for the court to consider the legality, constitutional validity and procedural fairness of the disciplinary process.

The LPDC had suspended Gadzama for three years after it was alleged that he poached and hijacked clients already represented by another lawyer, acted for judgment creditors who later denied instructing him, and continued taking steps in the case after some of them had disowned him.

Gadzama is contesting the findings, maintaining that the facts, evidence and applicable legal principles were not properly evaluated.

At the centre of his application is the question of how a disciplinary decision should be reviewed where the existing legal framework does not provide an effective appellate route for the affected practitioner.

The application cites the Supreme Court’s decision in the matter of Ben Mene-Ejegi, which clarified how decisions of the disciplinary body may be challenged. It argues that although an LPDC decision can have serious, immediate consequences for a practitioner, there is presently no effective appellate mechanism to review its merits and legality.

Gadzama’s challenge raises questions concerning access to justice, fair hearing, judicial oversight and constitutional safeguards for persons affected by disciplinary decisions.

The application also disputes how the proceedings against him were conducted, including the evaluation of evidence, procedural fairness, notice, reliance on collateral judicial observations, and allegations he says were not independently established. It contends that documentary evidence supporting his position was not properly evaluated and that serious conclusions were reached on matters requiring independent scrutiny and proof.

The proceedings invite the court to determine whether enforcing disciplinary directions without an effective avenue for appellate review is consistent with constitutional guarantees of fair hearing, natural justice and the rule of law.

The grant of leave allows Gadzama to pursue his application while preserving his right to practise as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria. Reliefs sought include orders on the legality of the LPDC’s decision and findings, and the constitutional validity of enforcing disciplinary sanctions without an effective appellate mechanism. NigerianTravel Guide

Gadzama said he respected the institutions of justice and had confidence in the Nigerian judicial system, adding that he would pursue every lawful avenue available to him in accordance with the Constitution and the rule of law. (The Nation)