NBA Crisis: JK Gadzama Alleges Professional Misconduct By NBA President, Asks Him to Recuse Himself

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief JK Gadzama has called on the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, Mr YC Maikyau, SAN to immediately recuse himself from office as the NBA President to enable proper investigation into a case of grave professional misconduct against him.

Chief Gadzama in a letter addressed to the NBA President and dated the 7th day of March 2023, accused Maikyau of Numerous acts constituting professional misconducts and requested that the NBA President, Recuse himself as the President of the Nigerian Bar Association.

Read the full letter below

J-K/ABJ/UNR/NBA/YCM/03/23

Tuesday, March 07, 2023.

Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau SAN,

NBA House,

Plot 1101, Mohammadu Buhari Way,

Central Business District Area, Abuja,

Federal Capital Territory,

Nigeria.

Dear Sir,

URGENT NEED FOR YOUR RECUSAL AS PRESIDENT OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (NBA)

Background

Please refer to your address delivered at the Valedictory Court Session held in honour of the retired Honourable Justice Ibrahim Nyaure Buba of the Federal High Court (my revered classmate of class ’86) on February 09, 2023, wherein you stated in paragraph 19 therein, that:

19. Unfortunately, those whose specific conducts came into focus in proceedings before the Courts, which conduct have been declared unethical and unprofessional are now being projected and celebrated as leading lights in the profession by the same institution that has the statutory responsibility for the discipline of lawyers. The Body, despite the finding of no less a Court than the Court of Appeal in Orngu & Ors. V, Gaadi & Ors. (2016) LPELR-42083(CA) at pages 55 – 62, paragraphs B – E, would make the same person whose conduct was condemned as unprofessional to be Chair of its Mentorship Committee.In fact, the conduct of the Chairman of the same Body had been unanimously condemned by the apex court in Biobarakuma Degi Eremienyo & Ors v. Peoples Democratic Party & Ors (2021) 16 NWLR (Pt 1800) 387 @ p 405, paras. B – D, per Augie, JSC. Subsequent revelations on the conduct of the same legal practitioner are no less an act of gross misconduct. (Underline and emphasis mine).

By this singular act, you have concluded that my conduct in the matter you referenced, i.e Re: Orngu & Ors. V, Gaadi & Ors, is unethical and unprofessional and that this notwithstanding, I had been projected and celebrated by the Body of Benchers, so much so that I was appointed as the chair of its Mentorship Committee. Upon sighting and reading your aforementioned unsavoury comments, I have only considered it important to put the records straight in light of your unfounded conclusions, lest they be misconstrued as the truth if uncontroverted.

Preliminary Remarks

I need not mention that by the grace of God Almighty, I have been a lawyer for about 38 years and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria for about 25 years (hoping to celebrate the silver jubilee this year). Also, I served as Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Abuja Branch (Unity Bar) as far back as 2002-2004 (21 years ago) and immediately thereafter as pioneer Chairman of the NBA Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL).

You did not stop at making spurious allegations against me, the Chairman of the Body of Benchers and the distinguished Body of Benchers, but you also extended your shenanigans to the Body of Senior Advocates (BoSAN) by mischievously stating at paragraph 24 of your address that:

24.Another apt example of our penchant for breaching even the rules we made for ourselves, is when the Body of Senior Advocates (BOSAN) blatantly ignores the provisions of its constitution regarding the Chairmanship of the Body. When the constitution clearly recognises the Honourable Attorney General and Minister of Justice as Chairman of the Body of Senior Advocates where the occupant of the office is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, the current HAGF Abubakar Malami, CON, SAN, has never been recognised as the Chairman of the Body. (See article 7 of the Constitution of the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria).

While the law you have cited is quite correct and not in dispute, your allegations of fact are very much incorrect. I have personally witnessed Attorneys-General of the Federation chairing meetings of the BoSAN, but most of the time they do not attend meetings of the BoSAN due to the hectic demands of their office, so the most senior member of the BoSAN has had reasonable cause to chair in those instances. Sitting Attorneys-General that chaired the BoSAN Quarterly meetings in my physical presence included Chief Bola Ige SAN (of Blessed Memory), Mr. Micheal Kaase Andoakaa SAN, Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke SAN and the current Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr Abubakar Malami SAN. Your efforts are therefore quite noted as the NBA has never been more divided as it is today. Your vain efforts at bringing the BoSAN, BOB and the legal profession into disrepute are also noteworthy. As you are aware, imputing false facts is incompatible with the status of a legal practitioner and is in itself an instance of professional misconduct.

Mentorship Committee

Please be informed that I have been organizing the annual Hon. Justice Chukwudifu Oputa Professional Training and Mentoring Programme for Young Lawyers and the program which has produced a large number of mentees will have its 8^th Edition held this year, 2023. It is in recognition of these and other efforts that I was found worthy of the membership and chairmanship of the Mentoring Committee of the Body of Benchers for over 5 years now, without any lobby.

Your Acts of Professional Misconduct

Furthermore, by the collective tenor of your assertions in your referenced address, you have successfully reviewed and passed judgement on a case you are a party to. You have conclusively reviewed, and even passed judgment in the case of ONYECHI EGWUONWU ESQ V. JOE-KYARI GADZAMA SAN & 6 ORS (FCT/CV/2237/2022), a case whose subject matter is the propriety or otherwise of your conclusions in Paragraph 19 of your referenced address. I say you are a party because the NBA has been sued therein as the 2^nd Defendant, and naturally, you are therefore seized of the facts and circumstances of the case. In fact, the NBA has taken steps to secure legal representation and has indeed filed processes through its lead counsel Mr. Nureini Jimoh, SAN, FICMC in the referenced matter which you know has been adjourned to March 30, 2023, for judgement.

Additionally, you are also aware that the entire decision of the Court of Appeal in Orngu & Ors. V, Gaadi & Ors(Supra) which you have referenced as the basis for your vile imputations against myself, is the subject of pending appeal entered before the Supreme Court as SC214/2017. Thus, the Supreme Court is exclusively seized of the whole proceedings relating thereto and/or arising therefrom. The appeal before the Supreme Court against the decision in Orngu & Ors. V, Gaadi & Ors is currently fixed for October 24, 2023 before the Supreme Court. While Suit No FCT/CV/2237/2022 has been argued and the matter adjourned to 30^th March, 2023 for judgement, you have however now gone ahead, for ulterior motives best known to your kind self, to make comments and draw conclusions on a matter that is subjudice in which you are a party, and which you also know has been adjourned for judgement.

Your comments are, at best, preemptive of the findings of the Supreme Court. Effectively, your NBA presidency now appears, and quite uncharitably, to be exercising concurrent jurisdiction with the Supreme Court over issues which are currently pending before the Apex Court. Also your comments, perhaps can be understood as an attempt calculated to prejudice or interfere with, or is reasonably capably of prejudicing or interfering with the judgment in Suit No FCT/CV/2237/2022. Indeed, this can only be equated with trying vigorously, to poison the mind of the judex.

As you very well know, it amounts to professional misconduct to comment on matters that are subjudice. To prime our memories, I have, for your ease of reference, provided ad verbatim Rule 33 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007 which provides succinctly:

“That a lawyer or law firm engaged in or associated with the prosecution or defence of a criminal matter or associated with a civil action shall not, while litigation is anticipated or pending in the matter, make or participate in making any exra-judicial statement that is calculated to prejudice or interfere with, or is reasonably capable of prejudicing or interfering with fair trial of the matter or the judgment or sentence therein.”

The very essence of this Rule, I suppose is not beyond you, neither is same far-fetched. Any attempt calculated to prejudice or interfere with, or reasonably capable of prejudicing or interfering with the fair trial of a matter or the judgment or sentence therein, is prohibited. When we make comments on matters that are subjudice, we open a floodgate for the ridicule of the judiciary and prejudice their decisions. We are also more likely to poison, or if you like, influence the minds of the judex, with the conviction of our conclusions, rightly or wrongly drawn. I should think, you are seized with these underlying raison d’êtres. Your comments in paragraph 19 of your address are therefore reasonably capable of prejudicing or interfering with the fair trial of both Suit No FCT/CV/2237/2022 which you know has been adjourned to 30/3/2023 for judgement, and the Appeal at the Supreme Court entered as SC214/2017 which comes up on October 24, 2023.

Accordingly, these are therefore prima facie instances of your professional misconduct and they now form the basis, amongst other considerations, for the urgent need to recuse yourself as the NBA president, for an independent review of your actions, especially as they relate to prima facie grounds for professional misconducts.

As you know, the NBA is the prosecutor before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) and will only prosecute cases for professional misconduct where a prima facie case had been established upon investigation. To facilitate this endeavour as independently and transparently as possible, it is pertinent that you recuse yourself as the president of the NBA.  The twin principle of fair hearing- hearing the other side and not being a judge in your own case – will be deeply rooted in finding a prima facie case or otherwise, only when you step aside for independent review. May it not be heard that you presided over your own investigation or that you occupied the position of influence over those who presided over your own investigation or that, your investigators were appointed by your good self. You will quite agree that it will make for a caricature of a fair hearing.

Your present conduct can only be understood to mean that the NBA is approbating and reprobating. The NBA itself agreed with my position in the Counter Affidavit filed by its lawyer Nureini Jimoh SAN in the case at the Federal High Court in re: ONYECHI EGWUONWU ESQ V. JOE-KYARI GADZAMA SAN & 6 ORS (FCT/CV/2237/2022), and confirmed essentially in Paragraph 8 of its Counter Affidavit filed in Opposition to the Originating Summons filed on 1st July 2022 that the comments by the Court of Appeal do not amount to a finding of guilt of professional misconduct on myself. Again, I have reproduced for your ease of reference.

“8. Contrary to paragraphs 6,7,8,11,12,15,18,20,22 and 29 of the Plaintiff’s affidavit, the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) is the only body vested with the powers of considering and determining cases of allegation of professional misconduct against any erring legal practitioners. The plaintiff failed to approach the LPDC and there is no proof of compliance in any of the Plaintiff’s exhibits attached to the originating summons. This court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this suit”

In paragraph 4.9 of its written address, the NBA further stated that:

Finding of guilt of professional misconduct as stipulated in Rule 55(1) of the RPC is vested in the LPDC which was established by the Legal Practitioners Act. See the cases of L.P.D.C v. Fawehinmi (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 300); NBA Lambo (2016) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1519) 197. In other words, the plaintiff has goofed by bringing the case before this Hon. Court. We submit that the court has no such jurisdiction and we urge my lord to so hold.

The NBA has even further recognized and restated in paragraph 5.4 of its Written Address in the aforementioned suit that the very decision which you have mischievously referenced in your address is the subject of appeal before the Supreme Court. Again, I have reproduced the said Paragraph 5.4 for your ease of reference:

5.4 We add that the Plaintiff failed to demonstrate or show where and how any of the disqualification factors applies to the 1^st Defendant. The pronouncement of the Court of Appeal in Exhibit A2 to the Affidavit in support of the Originating Summons did not adjudge or disqualify the 1^st Defendant. Aside, the said judgement is on appeal to the Supreme Court.

I consider it very a duty to commend to you the words of Jack Welsh, the late business mogul who simplified what true leadership is about. He said:

“Leadership, very simply, is about two things: 1. Truth and trust. 2. Ceaselessly seeking the former, relentlessly building the latter. “

As the leader that you profess to be, you must ceaselessly seek the truth; to do so, you must be open-minded. You must also relentlessly build trust. People are more inclined to trust a truthful leader, who stays true to the pursuit of truth and justice. The truth now appears that the NBA, under your regime, has come to divide the Bar rather than unite it. The Position of the NBA Presidency is a sensitive one, that must never be used in misleading the public. And it can only be unfortunate when one knows the truth and misrepresents them to score cheap nefarious goals.

Setting the Record Straight

Striking more at the substance of your grandly baseless allegations as contained in paragraph 19 of your address, I have highlighted, as succinctly as possible, the following points in my defence for the notice of the general public to whom your address was widely circulated in paid blogs, emails and social media:

1. The comments of the Court of Appeal in the ruling in Motion No. 377M/2015, now reported as the RE: Orngu & Ors. V, Gaadi & Ors (Supra) constitute an obiter dictumwhich did not find me guilty of professional misconduct.
2. The Notice of Change of Counsel contemplated under Rules 27(4) and 29(1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitionerswhich was the basis for the comments of the Court of Appeal, was actually filed by J-K Gadzama LLP at the Federal High Court in the matter.
3. The Notice of Change of Counsel, although filed was not available for the Court of Appeal to see because the application at the Court of Appeal in 377M/2015 was commenced by way of motion to set aside a Consent Judgement thus no Record of Appeal, which would have ordinarily shown the filed Notice of Change of Counsel, was transmitted to the Court of Appeal.
4. The entire decision of the Court of Appeal in 377M/2015 is subject of pending appeal entered before the Supreme Court as SC214/2017. Thus, the Supreme Court is exclusively seized of the whole proceedings relating thereto and/or arising therefrom.
5. For a comment in a judgment to be a ratio, it must relate to one of the Parties in the matter. I was not a party in motion 377M/2015 before the Court of Appeal.
6. I never signed the said Motion nor appeared in court in the appeal subject to which the obiteryou have mischievously referenced was made.
7. The Hon. Justice of the Court of Appeal raised the issue of appearances suo motuand answered the same question in his ruling which was not even an issue in the appeal and parties were not given a right of reply.
8. At any rate, the Notice of Change of Counsel was unnecessary because the matter for which my office was briefed had ended at the trial and was commencing afresh at the Court of Appeal.
9. It is the LPDC that has the powers to try cases of professional misconduct and mete out punishment in appropriate cases. The power and duty of the LPDC under sections 10 and 11 of the LPA to try and discipline legal practitioners found guilty of infamous conduct or other misconduct has been restated by the Courts in a number of cases.
10. I have never been found guilty of any professional misconduct by the LPDC, LPPC, any court or tribunal.

Comments by the Justice of the Court of Appeal

Though the comments of the Hon. Justice Ignatius Igwe Agube are not in consonance with the material facts stated above, I have neither alleged misconduct, incompetence, corruption or wrongdoing nor made any complaint against his lordship. I must say with all sense of sincerity of purpose that I am not a mischief maker. I am neither cantankerous nor have I ever dreamt of alleging corruption, misconduct or incompetence on the part of any judex or judicial authority, especially in a bid to promote primordial sentiments and nefarious goals.

My Demands

Ultimately, since you are an expert at asking senior colleagues to recuse themselves from offices based on spurious, vague and unproven allegations, please also be an expert at immediately recusing yourself based on this more serious allegation of professional misconduct.

For the avoidance of doubt, my specific demands are that you FORTHWITH:

1. Recuse yourself as the President of the Nigerian Bar Association;
2. Send me a letter of apology for your referenced misconceived publication; and
3. Publish your apology to the same audience your referenced address was published to, i.e electronically, by print, social media, email and in hardcopies.

Conclusion

While anticipating that you will, in the spirit of transparency, and impartiality, recuse yourself as the President of the NBA, to enable proper investigation into your prima facie professional misconducts as variously highlighted above, please accept as always, the assurances of my highest professional regards.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Joe-Kyari Gadzama, OFR, MFR, SAN

Pioneer Chairman, NBA-Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL), Pioneer Chairman NBA-Security Agencies Relations Committee(NBA-SARC),

Pioneer President Vox Populi Foundation for Good Leadership

Fmr Chairman, NBA Abuja Branch