The Federal High Court in Abuja has set aside the three-year suspension imposed on Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Joe-Kyari Gadzama, by the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), declaring its enforcement unconstitutional.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu, in a judgment delivered in the matter, held that implementing the LPDC’s direction against Gadzama without an effective appellate mechanism contravenes Sections 36(1), 36(2) and 6(6)(b) of the Constitution and is therefore unlawful.

The court also restrained the Body of Benchers, the LPDC, the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court and the complainant, Chris Alashi, from enforcing, publishing, transmitting or otherwise giving effect to the disciplinary decision.

In addition, the court barred the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court from recording any disciplinary sanction against Gadzama based on the LPDC’s directive and prohibited the circulation of the decision as a final disciplinary outcome against him.

The judgment followed a suit filed by Gadzama challenging the LPDC’s direction of July 29, 2026, issued in Complaint No. BB/LPDC/1314/2024 involving a petition by Alashi against Ocha P. Ulegede and another.

Gadzama had approached the court after the LPDC suspended him from legal practice for three years, while Ulegede received a two-year suspension.

The dispute originated from disagreements over the management and sharing of compensation arising from the Zaki-Biam litigation, particularly issues relating to legal representation and professional fees among counsel involved in the matter.

During the proceedings, Gadzama maintained that he had no professional relationship with Alashi and was never briefed by him, stating that his instructions came from separate judgment creditors.

Earlier, the court had granted Gadzama leave to seek judicial review and an order of certiorari to quash the LPDC’s direction following an ex parte application filed on August 19 by his legal team led by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Bolaji Ayorinde.

In the substantive application, Gadzama argued that there was no functional statutory mechanism through which he could appeal the LPDC’s decision, raising concerns about denial of fair hearing.

He also challenged findings made by the LPDC, including allegations relating to client solicitation and issues surrounding documentary evidence, insisting that the committee failed to establish his culpability.

The case has its roots in the protracted dispute over compensation for victims of the 2001 military operation in Zaki-Biam, Benue State. Following the incident, affected persons sued the Federal Government and secured a judgment of N41.8 billion in 2007. The decision was later reduced to an N8 billion settlement adopted by the Court of Appeal as a consent judgment.

Disagreements later emerged over the recovery and distribution of the settlement sum, as well as the role of various legal practitioners involved in the matter.

Gadzama became involved in 2015, claiming he was instructed by some judgment creditors to challenge the reduced settlement and pursue enforcement of the original judgment. However, the claim was disputed by Alashi and some parties to the suit.

In its decision, the LPDC had found Gadzama guilty of professional misconduct, relying in part on observations made by the Court of Appeal, and subsequently imposed the three-year suspension.

But in its ruling, the Federal High Court declared the disciplinary direction unconstitutional as it relates to Gadzama, effectively setting aside the suspension.

The court noted that the reliefs granted remain subject to the establishment of an effective appellate framework for disciplinary decisions affecting legal practitioners.