Abuja court blocks enforcement of Gadzama’s three-year legal suspension
The Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled that enforcement of a three-year suspension imposed on Senior Advocate Joe-Kyari Gadzama by the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee was unconstitutional. The court also barred disciplinary publication and notation, citing the absence of an effective appellate mechanism and questioning the committee’s jurisdiction.
The Federal High Court in Abuja has stopped the enforcement, publication and transmission of a three-year suspension imposed on Senior Advocate of Nigeria Joe-Kyari Gadzama by the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee. Justice Obiora Egwatu ruled that implementing the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee’s direction without an effective appellate mechanism was unconstitutional and unlawful, according to a statement from Mr Gadzama’s legal team. The statement said the court relied on Sections 36(1), 36(2) and 6(6)(b) of the Nigerian Constitution.
The court also held that the committee lacked jurisdiction in the matter, the legal team said. It barred the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court from making a disciplinary notation against Mr Gadzama and prohibited the decision from being published or circulated as a final disciplinary determination. The judgment followed Mr Gadzama’s challenge to the committee’s decision of 29 July 2026 in a complaint filed by Chris Alashi concerning legal representation and professional fees linked to compensation arising from the Zaki-Biam massacre litigation.
The committee had suspended Mr Gadzama for three years and lawyer Ocha Ulegede for two years. Mr Gadzama denied having a professional relationship with Mr Alashi or receiving instructions from him. He said he had been separately instructed by some judgment creditors in the dispute.
His lawyers argued that there was no effective statutory process for appealing the disciplinary decision. They also challenged findings concerning an allegedly forged document, alleged client poaching and conflicting affidavit evidence. The legal team argued that the existence of a signature on a document after its purported signatory’s death did not establish that Mr Gadzama forged or knowingly prepared it.
The underlying dispute concerns compensation for victims and survivors of a 2001 military operation in Zaki-Biam, Benue State. A Federal High Court judgment awarded N41.8 billion in 2007, while the parties later reached an N8 billion settlement that was adopted as a consent judgment by the Court of Appeal. The subsequent dispute focused on recovery, distribution and representation.
The court’s orders concerning Mr Gadzama were subject to the establishment of an effective appellate platform, according to his lawyers.
This independently written report is based on information supplied by the named publisher. Vertrix News has not independently verified the source report.