Senior lawyer and Life Bencheer, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama SAN has vowed to appeal the decision of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) which directed that he should be suspended from legal practice for three years following a complaint by a lawyer.

In a statement made available to CITY LAWYER, Gadzama stated that “In my respectful view, the documentary evidence before the Committee does not support the findings made against me.”

He stated that he has directed his lawyers to immediately appeal against the decision to the Supreme Court, noting that such appeal operates as a stay of execution pending determination of the appeal.

His words: “While I am yet to receive or review the certified true copy of the direction, I have instructed my legal team to file an immediate appeal. Pursuant to section 11(8)(a) of the Legal Practitioners Act, the filing of an appeal within the prescribed time prevents the direction from taking effect pending the determination of the appeal.”

Below is the full text of the statement.

STATEMENT BY J-K GADZAMA, SAN

My attention has been drawn to the direction delivered today, 29 July 2026, by the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) in Complaint No. BB/LPDC/1314/2024, instituted by Mr. Chris Alashi against Ocha P. Ulegede, Esq. and myself.

I have been informed that the Committee found against me and directed that I be
suspended from legal practice for a period of three years. While I am yet to receive or
review the certified true copy of the direction, I have instructed my legal team to file an
immediate appeal. Pursuant to section 11(8)(a) of the Legal Practitioners Act, the filing of
an appeal within the prescribed time prevents the direction from taking effect pending
the determination of the appeal.

I hold the institutions established to regulate the legal profession in the highest regard
and remain firmly committed to the rule of law. However, I respectfully disagree with the
Committee’s decision and firmly believe that it is not supported by the evidence or the
applicable law.

The complaint against me alleged that I improperly took over another lawyer’s brief,
solicited clients and wrongfully appropriated professional fees. Those allegations are,
with respect, unfounded. I was retained directly by the Judgment Creditors through
written letters of instruction and acted throughout strictly in accordance with that
professional retainer. In my respectful view, the documentary evidence before the
Committee does not support the findings made against me.

It is equally important to note that the complaint fundamentally arose from a dispute
concerning legal representation and professional fees. I remain firmly convinced that the
disciplinary process was not the appropriate forum for resolving such issues.

I have every confidence that the Supreme Court will carefully consider the legal and
factual issues raised by this matter and arrive at a just determination.

I wish to reassure my clients, colleagues, friends and the general public that, upon the
filing of the appeal within the time prescribed by law, my right to practise as a legal
practitioner remains unaffected pending the final determination of the appeal, in
accordance with the provisions of the Legal Practitioners Act.

I am deeply grateful for the overwhelming support, goodwill and prayers I have received
from colleagues, clients, friends and members of the public. I remain steadfast in my
commitment to the legal profession, the administration of justice and the highest
standards of professional integrity.

I trust in the judicial process and remain confident that justice will ultimately prevail.

J-K Gadzama, SAN

(C) CITY LAWYER Magazine. All rights reserved. To join our Channel, click here. Click here to join our WhatsApp chatroom. Contact us at citylawyermag@gmail.com or 081-3838-0083.