Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, LPDC, a body of benchers saddled with the responsibility of checkmating the conducts of legal practitioners in the country has suspended a one-time Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, Anaocha branch, one of the eight branches of NBA in Anambra state, Jideofor Okongwu Esq. for alleged infamous conduct.
In a unanimous decision reached by the five-member LPDC after its deliberations for three years in an Originating Application filed in September, 2020 by the Applicant, Chief Alfred Ejindu, against the Respondent (Okongwu), the committee stated that they found him guilty of the infamous conduct in the course of performing his duty as a legal practitioner contrary to Rules 1, 24 (2)&(3), 32(3)k and 55(1) of the rules of professional conduct for legal practitioners Act. Cap .L11 LFN 2004 (as amended).
In what they termed as final direction of the committee read out by one of the five- member committee, Ahmed Mustapha Goniri Esq, (life bencher), the LPDC said: “we are satisfied that the proper order to make in the circumstances is to direct that the Respondent, Jideofor Okongwu Esq. be, and is hereby suspended from the roll of legal practitioners and from engaging in the business of practicing law for a period of three (3) years from the date of this direction”.
The committee therefore directed the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court to effect the order and to make notation on this direction against the name of the Respondent, Jideofor Okongwu Esq on roll of legal practitioners.
“This order shall forthwith be brought to the attention of the Chief Registrar of the Supreme court. We further order that notice of this direction be immediately given and brought to the attention of the attention of the Respondent, the presence of the Respondent at the proceedings of this committee where this direction is read shall be deemed to be sufficient personal service, by publication in the Federal Gazette as required by law”.
“Copies of this direction must be served on the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA who shall take steps to notify the General Council of the bar, National Executive Committee, NEC of NBA and other organs of the NBA”.
On the issue of certificate forgery preferred against the Respondent by the Applicant, as contained in his originating application, the committee however, insisted that if the Respondent actually forged secondary school and WAEC certificates and maneuvered the system to become a lawyer in Nigeria, the case is left for the Nigeria Police Force to investigate as the committee has no jurisdiction to delve into the matter.
The Applicant, Ejindu had in September, 2020 dragged the Respondent, Okongwu Esq to the committee whose five members included Hon. Justice Dr. Ishaq Bello, OFR (Chairman), Hon. Justice Aisha Bashir Aliyu , CJ Nasarawa (member), Ahmed Mustapha Goniri (life bencher-member) , Ebenezer Obeys (life bencher-member) and Mr. Obafemi Adewale SAN (life bencher-member).
Ejindu’s Originating Application dated September 14, 2020 and filed on September 30, 2020, supported by a 13-paragraph affidavit sworn to by himself dated September 21, 2020, while the Respondent, Okongwu’s statement of defence dated March 12, 2021and filed on March 19, 2021, was supported by a 15 paragraph affidavit setting out his defense dated and filed on March 11, 2021.
The applicant’s grouse against the respondent was that since the Respondent was called to the bar as a lawyer, the entire Adazi Enu community of Anambra state has never known peace due to his harassment and intimidation of every one with frivolous law suits and instigation of direct criminal complaints and use of police with his background as a lawyer against the poor rural people.
The Applicant further stated in his originating application that when he advised the Respondent to stop using his background as a lawyer to be harassing his own people, he threatened to include him in the list of those he will ceaselessly harass and prosecute for daring to advise him, adding that on or about March 2020, the Respondent filed and served on him a magistrate court suit laying claim to the applicant’s ancestral land which the Respondent’s late father never contested while alive.
He contended that while the above suit which the committee marked as Exhibit W A 1 was pending, the Respondent filed another suit at the High Court marked as Exhibit W A 2 over the same issue, adding that very annoying and painful was that again, while these two suits were pending, he filed two other separate suits in one month at the Costomary Courts over the same subject matter marked as Exhibit W A 3 and W A 4.
He insisted that the above acts of the Respondent are contrary to Ruled 32 (3) (k) of the rules of professional conduct for legal practitioners.
The Applicant who in conclusion, also accused the Respondent of committing certificate forgery, having been called to the Bar with adulterated name (different from the one contained in his secondary school and WAEC certificates), therefore urged the committee to conduct disciplinary action against the respondent for his overwhelming gross acts of professional misconduct.
Reacting to the complaints, the Respondent denied the allegations debunking the applicant’s claims as to his relationship to the community, adding that he filed the suits against the applicant because the first one was struck out by the magistrate court for lack of jurisdiction.
The Respondent also debunked the allegation from the applicant that his certificate does not qualify him as a lawyer, adding that if indeed these grave allegations were right, how did he manage to graduate from Delta State University?
