 |
| Clementina E. Ukiri, Esq. |
The integrity of the Nigerian legal profession, a cornerstone of the nation’s justice system, rests on the ethical conduct of its practitioners. When that integrity is compromised by unprofessional conduct, the disciplinary machinery of the profession must act decisively. A recent decision by the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) to suspend a former NBA branch chairman for two years serves as a stark reminder of the grave consequences that await lawyers who engage in sharp practices and abuse the court process.
Defining the Unprofessional: Sharp Practices and Abuse of Court Processes
The terms "sharp practices" and "abuse of court processes" are not mere legal jargon; they represent a fundamental betrayal of a lawyer's duty to both the court and the client. While not exhaustively defined in any single statute, Nigerian courts and the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) have consistently interpreted them to include any conduct that perverts the course of justice or frustrates the judicial process.
In the locus classicus case of Saraki v. Kotoye (1992) 9 NWLR (Pt. 264) 156, the Supreme Court defined abuse of court process as "an improper use of the judicial process by a party in litigation to interfere with the due administration of justice." This encompasses a wide range of actions, including:
1. Filing Frivolous and Vexatious Applications: Initiating baseless or repetitive legal proceedings solely to harass an opponent or cause unnecessary delay.
2. Misleading the Court: Concealing material facts or presenting false information to deceive a judge into granting a favourable order.
3. Wilful Disobedience of Court Orders: Advising or assisting a client to violate a subsisting court order. The LPDC's finding against those who are liable for professional misconduct by "scuttling the execution of a Court judgment", is a direct example of this.
4. Using Improper Documents: A lawyer can be found liable for signing motions or other court documents that they did not prepare or that are fraudulent in nature, as this constitutes a grave misrepresentation to the court.
These actions not only cause financial and emotional distress to opposing parties but also erode public confidence in the judicial system as a fair and impartial arbiter.
The Disciplinary Framework and its Teeth
The power to discipline a lawyer for professional misconduct is vested in the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), a body established under the Legal Practitioners Act, Cap. L11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 (LPA). The Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners, 2023 (RPC) serves as the primary code of conduct, outlining the ethical standards expected of every lawyer.
Upon receiving a complaint, the LPDC conducts a hearing and, if it finds a lawyer guilty of "infamous conduct in a professional respect" or other forms of misconduct, it can impose a range of sanctions:
1. Admonition: A formal reprimand or warning to the erring lawyer.
2. Suspension: The lawyer is temporarily barred from practicing law for a specified period. This was the fate of the first respondent, who received a two-year suspension.
3. Striking Off the Roll: The ultimate penalty, where the lawyer's name is permanently removed from the Roll of Legal Practitioners. This effectively ends their career as a lawyer.
The LPDC's authority to impose these penalties underscores the seriousness with which the profession views sharp practices.
 |
| Clementina E. Ukiri, Esq. |
The Case in Point: A Lesson in Disciplinary Action and Integrity.
The LPDC’s final direction in Complaint No.: BB/LPDC/498/2021 provides a powerful, practical illustration of the disciplinary process at work.
While both respondents were found liable for professional misconduct, the outcomes were starkly different. The first respondent was suspended for two years. His actions were deemed serious enough to warrant a significant period away from practice. However, the second respondent, who was found to have been misled by a colleague, received only an admonition. The LPDC specifically praised her "courage for owning up to her shortcomings and leading this Committee to doing justice."
This disparity in punishment is not an act of leniency but a testament to the value of professional integrity and candor. By cooperating and providing a full account, the second respondent demonstrated a commitment to truth that ultimately distinguished her. Her actions serve as a powerful lesson for all lawyers: while the pursuit of justice is paramount, it must be pursued with honesty and within the bounds of ethical conduct.
A Call for a Return to Professionalism.
The legal profession is a noble one, and its practitioners are officers of the court, not just advocates for their clients. It is time for every lawyer to re-evaluate their professional ethos. The focus should shift from a win-at-all-costs mentality to one rooted in the principles of honesty, fairness, and a deep respect for the rule of law.
Furthermore, leadership at the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) must play a more proactive role in fostering a culture of accountability. To this end, every NBA branch should establish a transparent committee dedicated to educating the public on the appropriate channels for lodging complaints against unethical lawyers. This initiative would not only empower the community but also serve as a deterrent, reinforcing that sharp practices will be swiftly addressed.
Lawyers must understand that their license is not an absolute right but a privilege that carries with it a solemn obligation. The practice of filing frivolous applications, engaging in deliberate delay tactics, or assisting clients in disobeying court orders not only harms the opposing party but ultimately undermines the very foundation of the legal system. As the LPDC has repeatedly shown, such conduct comes with a heavy price.
To the entire Nigerian Bar, this is a call to action. Let the fate of those who have faced the disciplinary committee serve as a cautionary tale. Uphold the sacred trust reposed in you by the public and the judiciary. Desist from sharp practices and any form of professional misconduct, for the failure to do so risks not just a temporary suspension, but the ultimate professional demise of being struck off the Roll of Legal Practitioners. The honour and future of the profession depend on it.
0 Comments