ROTIMI WILLIAMS AKINTOKUN v. LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE (LPDC)

On the 4th day of April, 2006, after completion of hearing, the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee [LPDC] of the Body of Benchers, delivered its Direction in which it directed the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court to strike off the name of Mr. Akintokun from the Roll, as a legal practitioner in Nigeria.
Mr. Akintokun was dissatisfied with the direction of the LPDC and he lodged his appeal to this court.
Parties to the appeal filed and exchanged briefs of argument. The appeal was slated for hearing on the 22nd day of October, 2013.
On the hearing date, the panel, headed by my learned brother, Onnoghen, JSC; raised the issue, suo motu; whether the Honourable court has the jurisdiction to hear an appeal direct from the LPDC, in view of the court’s recent decision in ALADEJOBI V NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION. Appeal No.SC.121/2011, delivered on the 12th day of July, 2013 (now reported in (2013) 15 NWLR (PT.1376) 66).
Some arguments were proffered before the panel by each of the counsel for the respective parties, both asking the court to depart from its decision given earlier in Aladejobi’s case The panel exercised its discretion and fixed the 13th of January 2014, for the issue raised to be heard by a full court, consisting of a seven member panel. That is how the present panel which took arguments from the parties, came about. It is to be noted that the Hon. Attorney General of the Federation and the President of the Nigerian Bar Association were invited by the court to serve as Amicus Curiae with a view to enriching the arguments on the issue at hand.
In all the four briefs of argument filed by [1] Chief Bolaji Ayorinde, SAN who is for the appellant in the appeal; [2] Mr. Emmanuel C. Aguma for the respondent in the appeal; [3] Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke, SAN, as Amicus Curiae and [4] Mr. Oke Wali, SAN, Amicus Curiae, the single issue raised for determination is similar and that is:”Whether in view of its recent decision in JIDE ALADEJOBI V. NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to entertain the instant appeal against the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee.”
In his submissions, the learned senior counsel for the appellant in the main appeal, Chief Bolaji Ayorinde (whom I shall be referring to hereinbelow as “Chief Ayorinde”, for short), argued that the decision of this court in the case of Aladejobi v Nigerian Bar Association now reported in (2013) 15 NWLR (P1.1376) 66, to the effect that the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain appeal against the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee was given per incuriam and he insisted this court to depart from its decision in Aladejobi’s case. He referred to the case of Charles Okike v The Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (No.1) 2005 3-4 SC 49 at 67, where this court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from the Directions of the LPDC. Chief Ayorinde submitted that the decision in Okike (supra) was never overruled in Aladejobi’s case. It was Okike v. LPDC (No.2) (2005) 15 NWLR (Pt.49) 471 which was considered and is clearly different and distinct from Okike No.1. He submitted that the principle of law decided in Okike No.1 is still valid and subsisting and it is the law to be followed as regards jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to entertain appeal from the Directions of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee.