LPDC: More woes for ex-APGA lawyers—Ikwueto, Ikpeazu, Agunzi as Njoku-led ex-co drags them to disciplinary c’tee

May face stiff sanctions

The woes facing senior legal practitioners, Mr. P. I. N. Ikwueto, SAN., Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu and Victor Agunzi, Esq. may have just started as the Executive Committee of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), led by Chief Edozie Njoku, has dragged them to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) sitting in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

The is contained in a petition addressed to the LPDC Chairman, dated September 2, 2024.

The petition was entitled “Complaint Of conducts and actions unbecoming of senior legal practitioners against Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, P. I. N. Ikwueto, SAN and Victor Agunzi, Esq.”

Ikwueto, Ikpeazu and Agunzi disengaged

It could be recalled that Diaspora Digital Media (DDM) reported on October 2, 2024, that APGA National Chairman, Chief Njoku, disengaged Mr. Ikwueto, Dr. Ikpeazu and C. I. Mbaeri, Esq. from representing APGA in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/966/2024) or any other suit relating to APGA.

According to the letter, others affected by the disengagement include Victor Agunzi Esq., Tobechukwu Nweke Esq., Chinedu Eze Esq., Dr. Obinna Onya Esq. and Celestine Ezeokeke Esq.

This was contained in a “Letter of Disengagement as APGA External Solicitors“, dated September 26 and signed by Njoku himself.

Speaking, Njoku cited “some calculated, consistent and concerted efforts on your part to cause crisis in our party, through undue duplicity of suits amounting to abuse of court process and forum shopping and brazen disrespect and disregard to subsisting orders/judgement of courts”.

He, therefore, stated conclusively: “I truly find it strange that you will go to any Court of law to represent APGA…

• knowing fully well that I am the National Chairman of APGA, who is fully recognized by the body in charge of regulating political parties in Nigeria, which is captured on their website;
• knowing fully well that there is no instruction given to you by myself or the National Legal Adviser you went ahead to file an action on behalf of APGA.”

He, thereby, debriefed all affected lawyers and forbade them from further representing APGA in any suit whatsoever unless they are instructed by him or Barr Hammon Bubo Ghide, the National Legal Adviser, to do so.

“I truly find it strange that Learned Silks will go to the Federal High Court to represent our party (APGA), without due authorization from me as the recognized National Chairman of APGA by INEC,” he regretted.

Finally, Njoku appointed Paul Erokoro, SAN, Barristers Michael Ajara and Panam Ntui as lawyers to act as external solicitors forthwith.

Ikwueto, Ikpeazu and Agunzi to appear before LPDC

However, not done with the disengaged lawyers, the Chief Njoku-led APGA Executive Committee has dragged the affected lawyers to LPDC.

If and when the petition is ratified, the legal practitioners may face stiff sanctions, which may include disrobement.

A 40-paragraph affidavit to back the complaint signed by APGA National Secretary, Hon. Muhyideen Imam, reads in full:

~~~

We, the National Working Committee (NWC) of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) are constrained to officially forward this complaint against the above Legal Practitioners to you and the LPDC for your necessary actions.

The duo of very senior counsel and Learned Senior Advocates of Nigeria, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN and P. I. N. Ikwueto, SAN and their Partner, Victor Agunzi, Esq, represented Chief Victor Ike Oye, who sought and was joined in an appeal that got up to the Supreme Court in SC/CV/687/2021 from the Court of Appeal, Kano Division. The said appeal emanated from the decision of the Jigawa State High Court (Suit No: JDU/022/2021) delivered on 30th June, 2021.

The subject matter of the suit commenced at the Jigawa State High Court giving effect to the suspension of the National Chairman of APGA, Chief Edozie Njoku and the appropriate person to step in as the Acting National Chairman among the other Exco Members of the Party elected together with the National Chairman at the Party Convention held in Owerri on the 31st of May, 2019.

The trial Court upheld the purported suspension of Chief Edozie Njoku, the National Chairman (as prayed the Court by the Plaintiff, Alhaji Rabiu Garba Aliyu). However, in line with the Party’s Constitution, the Court pronounced the Deputy National Chairman-South, Chief Jude Okeke, being from the same region with the suspended Chairman, as the Acting National Chairman of the Party. Being dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court refusing him to act as the Acting National Chairman, Alhaji Aliyu appealed to the Court of Appeal, Kano, which court dismissed the appeal and set aside the decision of the trial court on the grounds that the subject matter was an internal party affair, which is not justiciable.

Consequently, and being dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, Chief Jude Okeke, appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which delivered its final decision on 14th October, 2021.

However, the final decision of the Supreme Court, which dismissed the appeal and upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision, was bedeviled with errors, as the name of Chief Victor Ike Oye was mistakenly inserted at page 13 of the lead judgment, instead of the name of Chief Edozie Njoku, who was the embattled Chairman and the subject matter of the entire suit.

On the discovery of the error, Chief Edozie Njoku, promptly officially wrote to the Supreme Court, and copied Honourable Justice Mary Odili, who presided, wrote and read the lead judgment, as well as all the other justices who sat and heard the appeal, to draw their attention to the obvious errors.

On receipt of Chief Njoku’s letter, Honourable Justice Mary Odili, promptly replied Chief Njoku and acknowledged the error with regret and subsequently corrected the errors in the judgment. After the correction of the errors, Chief Njoku applied and obtained Certified True Copies of the judgment from the Registry of the Court.

The duo of the Senior Counsel and their partner Victor Agunzi, Esq, who vigorously prosecuted the appeal for their client, Chief Victor Ike Oye and who were aware of the errors and the correction effected by Honourable Justice Mary Odili, when Chief Njoku drew their attention to the errors. Knowing that the effected corrections will clearly state the position of the judgment and show clearly that the judgment was not in their client’s favour, the Senior Counsel instigated their client to write a petition to the Nigerian Police alleging that Chief Njoku together with the Personal Secretary to Honourable Justice Mary Odili, connived to forge and alter the judgment of the Supreme Court in his favour. Their stand subtly portrayed the Honourable Justice in bad light, as they were well aware that the allegations were false, unfounded and actuated by malice. The Police was lured to investigate and prosecute Chief Njoku and another member of the National Executive Committee of APGA, Mr. Chukwuemeka Nwoga.

Notwithstanding that the Police found no evidence whatsoever against Chief Njoku, the senior counsel pressured the Police to trumped-up charges and filed Charge No. FCT/HC/CR/12/2022: IGP V. Chief Njoku & Anor, against Chief Njoku and another. They were subsequently arrested, detained and charged to court.

While trials were on-going Victor Agunzi, Esq was always in Court watching brief for their Client, who was the nominal complainant. The allegations of the forgery were masterminded and forced through by the Senior Counsel, who ordinarily ought to protect the integrity of the Court and uphold the rule of law.

In addition, in their attempt to intimidate the presiding Judge and have their way, Victor Agunzi wrote a petition against the Judge and submitted same to the Chief Judge of the FCT. While the petition was still pending, Victor Agunzi, at the open court, told the Judge to recuse himself from the matter for bias and compromise.

Instead of protecting the court and upholding the rule of law, the counsel was rather engaging in acts that smeared and ridiculed the integrity and standing of Honourable Justice Mary Odili and the Court in general. The trials were commenced and concluded and the court found no iota of evidence in support of the forgery allegations and accordingly dismissed the Charge and discharged and acquitted Chief Njoku and the other member of the NWC in its’ judgment delivered on the 5th of December, 2023.

While the controversies and scandals that rocked the Court over the forgery allegations of the Supreme Court Judgment was ongoing, the Supreme Court, through the Chief Registrar of the Court, wrote and replied Chief Njoku’s letter on 19th January, 2023.

In the said letter, the Chief Registrar, on the directives of the Honourable Chief Justice of Nigeria, advised Chief Njoku to file a formal application in the Court for the correction of the errors, pursuant to Order 8 Rule 16 of the Rules of the Supreme Court. As advised, Chief Njoku accordingly through his counsel filed the necessary application, which application was vigorously opposed by the senior counsels on behalf of their client. After the hearing and determination of the application, the Court found merit and accordingly granted the reliefs sought and effected the corrections in the said judgment, in its Ruling delivered on Friday, the 24th of March, 2023. The said Ruling has been reported and published in the Law Reports, as NJOKU V. OKEKE & ORS (2023) LPELR-61016 (SC); and NJOKU V. OKEKE & ORS (2024) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1945) 145.

The above Senior Counsel having put up all kinds of resistance and opposition to prevent the Supreme Court from correcting the errors, which failed, they now resorted to advising and encouraging their client not to comply with the judgment of the Supreme Court and to continue to act and function as the National Chairman of APGA, against the judgment of the Court. These acts and conducts of failing to comply with the judgment, prompted some members of the NWC of APGA, Otunba Lateef Ogidan and Alh. Rabiu Mustapha, to commence a suit (FCT/HC/CV/4068/2023) against Chief Victor Ike Oye and INEC, for the court to enforce and give effect to the Supreme Court judgment.

Upon the service of the originating processes on the parties, the Senior Counsel, again started employing all manners of tactics to frustrate, delay and prevent the proceedings going on smoothly. For instance, being proceedings commenced by Originating Summons, any Defendant/Respondent who wish to respond ought to file the counter affidavit together with the Preliminary Objection (PO), where they so intend to object, but in this case, the Senior Counsel only first filed their Preliminary Objection and did not file their counter affidavit together with the Objection at once.

Just filing only their objection without their counter affidavit, was ostensibly to just delay the proceedings. When the court refused to yield to their antics they started changing counsel almost at every sitting, using the changes as excuses to ask for adjournments, meanwhile all the counsel that were appearing were from the same office of Ikpeazu Chambers.

When they discovered that the Court was firm and was not unnecessarily adjourning the matter the way they wanted, they decided to petition the Presiding Judge, Honourable Justice M. A. Madugu to the Chief Judge of the FCT High Court, on the allegation of biases and prejudices and wanted the judge to excuse himself from the matter. Before even getting any response or decision from the Chief Judge, the counsel started grandstanding at every sitting of the Court and mounting unnecessary pressure on the Judge to step aside and recuse himself from further hearing of the matter. Without providing any basis for their allegations and in the absence of anything to support their claims, the Judge continued with the hearing of the matter.

Having failed to get their way and to control the Judge the way they wanted, the Senior Counsel, as the proceedings progressed resorted to blatantly emboldening and advising their client not to obey and comply with the Orders of the Court. They also employed all manner of ways to frustrate the Court from making steady progress in dispensing with the matter speedily. For instance, on one occasion when the matter was adjourned to the 10th of May, 2023, despite having been served with the court processes, instead of filing and serving their Counter Affidavit and their objection before the said day, they elected to file only their Preliminary Objection and served same on the very day the matter was slated for hearing, thereby frustrating the hearing on that day. Meanwhile, the Court had earlier refused the Plaintiffs’ Motion Ex-part for Interim Injunction, to restrain the Defendants from continuing in their activities, which were contravening the Judgment of the Court, the Court rather ordered that the Defendants be put on Notice and adjourned the matter to 10th May, 2023 for hearing.

On that day for hearing, instead of filing and serving their processes before that date for the matter to be ripe for hearing, they failed to do so, just to frustrate the hearing of the matter on that date. The Court realizing that the Defendants were benefiting from the delays deliberately caused by them, granted the application made by the Plaintiffs’ counsel for the Court to restrain parties from taking any further steps that may render nugatory the decision of the Court, pending the hearing of the Preliminary Objection filed by the 1st Defendant. Notwithstanding that the parties were represented by their counsel and were equally served with the Order of Court restraining parties not to hold any meeting, congresses or convention for the purpose of doing anything in the name of APGA, the 1st Defendant defiled the Order of Court on the advice of his counsel and continued doing all the acts the court had restrained parties from.

In order to further embolden and encourage their client in carrying and going on with the activities restrained by the Order of Court made on 10th May, 2023, the counsel initiated and instigated another suit to be commenced at the Anambra State High Court, sitting in Otuocha, Suit No. OT/79/2023. In the said Court, they procured another Order on 12th May, 2023, just to frustrate the earlier Order of 10th May, 2024 from the FCT High Court, which suit was subsisting before that instituted at Anambra State. On the advice and encouragement from the Senior Counsel, their client, Chief Victor Ike Oye went ahead with the APGA Congresses and National Convention in clear contravention of the Order of the FCT High Court, made on 10th May, 2023. Their flagrant disobedient to the Order of the Court, forced the Plaintiffs to commence Committal proceedings against their client in Motion No. M/10786/2023 and they were eventually found in contempt, but, however, given time to purge themselves or face the wrath of the law.

All attempts by the Senior Counsel to frustrate the proceedings at the FCT High Court in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/4068/2023: OTUNBA LATEEF OGIDAN & ANOR V. CHIEF VICTOR IKE OYE & ANOR, which was before Honourable Justice M. A. Madugu, failed, as the Honourable Justice refused to be intimidated and continued firmly and fairly to the end, and delivered the final judgments on the 6th of June, 2023 in the substantive Suit, and 11th November, 2023 in the Committal Proceedings, respectively. Dissatisfied with the Judgments of the trial Court, the Senior Counsel on behalf of their client appealed the two final judgments to the Court of Appeal.

While the committal proceedings were still pending at the trial court, the Senior Counsel who know the status of a Judgment of court, especially that of the Supreme Court, being the final Court, knew or ought to know, cannot be further subjected to any review or interpretation by any staff of the Court, but because of their desperation to win at all costs and to frustrate any further proceedings, facilitated and procured a letter dated 6th June, 2023 from one Yusuf A. Babasoro, DCR (Litigation) of the Supreme Court of Nigeria for their use. The contents of the said letter suggest to reviewing the Judgment of the Court and it also suggest exonerating and absorbing their client and INEC from any disobedience of the Order of Court. After procuring the said letter, the Senior Counsel used same in the defense of their client both at the trial court and at the Court of Appeal.

Fortunately, the two appeals commenced by the Senior Counsel for their client, Appeal Nos. CA/ABJ/CV/724/2023 and CA/ABJ/CV/1169/2023: CHIEF VICTOR IKE OYE V. OTUNBA LATEEF OGIDAN & ORS, were successfully heard and determined and on 28th June, 2024, the Court of Appeal delivered its final judgments dismissing the two appeals and upholding the two trial court’s decisions, which enforced and gave effect to the judgment of the Supreme Court delivered on 14th October, 2021 and further corrected on 24th March, 2024, as well as the trial court’s judgment finding the Appellant in contempt of the Order of Court made on 10th May, 2023.

On the 27th of May, 2024, while Appeal No. CA/ABJ/CV/724/2023 was being heard, one of the Senior Counsel to the Appellant, P. I. N. Ikwueto, while making his submissions in support of the Appeal, drew the Court’s attention to a judgment of the Court and the letter dated 6th June, 2023 from the DCR of the Supreme Court, all procured to overreach the 1st and 2nd Respondents. Unfortunately, that was the first time both the Court and the Respondents’ attention was drawn to the said documents. Even at the trial Court, the documents were never produced nor ever mentioned during the pendency of the substantive Suit, which gave rise to the appeal.

After the hearing and adoptions of the respective Briefs of the parties on the 27th of May, 2024, the judgment was reserved for a date to be communicated to the parties. The Appellant’s counsel subsequently forwarded copies of the said judgment and the letter to the Court, copies were also served on the parties via an affidavit of fact, filed on 27th May, 2024.  On receipt of the said affidavit of fact on the 29th of May, 2024, which exhibited the judgment of the Court of Appeal and the letter dated 6th June, 2023 from the DCR of the Supreme Court, the 1st and 2nd also filed and served a Counter Affidavit in response to the Appellant’s Affidavit of Fact.

As stated in the Counter Affidavit of the 1st and 2nd Respondents in response to the Appellant’s Affidavit of Fact, the Court of Appeal’s Judgment mentioned and produced by the Senior Counsel while making their submissions at the Court of Appeal on 27th May, 2024, was gotten and procured with the aids of the counsel, without the knowledge, consent or authority of the party, APGA and its Members mentioned as parties in the said appeal.

The said judgment emanated and arose from the decision of the Federal High Court Abuja in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1750/2022: OKORIE & ORS V. INEC & ORS, delivered by Honourable Justice J. K. Omotosho on the 28th of March, 2023. The said suit at the Federal High Court Abuja was commenced by the party and some of its members, who took the action against INEC for its refusal to recognize the candidates sponsored and nominated by the NWC of the party led by Chief Edozie Njoku, after the Supreme Court Judgment delivered on 14th October, 2021, that laid to rest the controversy over the suspended National Chairman.

The Parties in the above suit, who commenced the action as Plaintiffs against INEC and others for not recognizing their candidates in line with the Supreme Court decision delivered on 14th October, 2021, were: APGA, Chief Chekwas Okorie, Jonathan Oyiborhino Osigho and Hon. Barr. Sopuluchukwu E. Ezeonwuka. The main defense of the Defendants in the suit was that it was the name of Chief Victor Ike Oye that was mentioned as the National Chairman of APGA in the said Supreme Court judgment and not the name of Chief Edozie Njoku. Meanwhile it was crystal clear from the judgment that the mention and insertion of the name of Chief Victor Ike Oye instead of the name of Chief Edozie Njoku, was a clear error and accidental slip, which error Chief Edozie Njoku had already applied for its correction. As soon as the correction was effected by the Supreme Court in its Ruling delivered on 24th March, 2023, the Plaintiffs ensured a copy of the Ruling effecting the correction to the judgment was forwarded to the Federal High Court before it delivered its judgment on 28th March, 2023.

However, notwithstanding that the attention of the Court was drawn to the Ruling of the Supreme Court correcting the error, the Senior Counsel ensured that the Court ignored the correction made and still based its judgment on the judgment which contained the error.

On the part of the party, APGA, as soon as the error was corrected, the party urged its members, who were Plaintiffs in the suit not to appeal the judgment of the Federal High Court to the Court of Appeal, since the basis of the judgment of the court was the error which has been corrected in the Ruling of the Supreme Court delivered on 24th March, 2023, which finally laid the controversy to rest.

Strangely, even with the Ruling correcting the error, which the Senior Counsel had capitalized on as the basis of their advice to their client for claiming benefit from the Supreme Court judgment, they still continued to counsel and advised their client not to back down from acting as the National Chairman of APGA. Their continuous actions and disobedience to the judgment of the Supreme Court, prompted some Executive members of the Chief Edozie Njoku Executives to commence action to enforce and give effect to the judgment at the FCT High Court, Abuja. At the end of the proceedings, the Court held in their favour, dissatisfied with the findings of the FCT High Court, the counsel appealed to the Court of Appeal, Abuja, the Court of Appeal dismissed their Appeals and upheld the decisions of the trial court on all the issues raised. Still being dissatisfied with the judgments of the Court of Appeal, the Senior Counsel have again filed their Notices of Appeal challenging the decisions of the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court.

Notably, after the decisions of the Court of Appeal dismissing the two appeals filed by the Senior Counsel for their client, while upholding the decisions of the trial court on all issues raised, INEC have finally now ignored the counsels of the senior counsel to now comply with the judgment of the court, which ordered as follows:

“The act(s) of the Respondents refusing to obey and comply with the subsisting judgments of the Supreme Court made on the 14th October, 2021 and corrected on the 24th March, 2023 and duly served on them amounts to disobedience of the Judgments and Orders of the Supreme Court.

a. The actions of the 1st Respondent posing and parading himself and occupying the Party’s Secretariat as the National Chairman of APGA contrary to the judgment and order of the Supreme Court made on the 14th October, 2021 and corrected on the 24th March, 2023 is in disobedience of the Judgments of the Supreme Court.

b. An Order of injunction is hereby granted restraining the 2nd Respondent, whether by itself, agents, privies, assigns, authorized representatives or whosoever described from accepting, recognizing and dealing with the 1st Respondent.

c. The Respondents must comply with the decision of the Supreme Court made on the 14th October, 2021 and subsequently corrected on the 24th March, 2023, which was exhibited as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 4(A & B) in the supporting affidavit of the Originating Summons which has also been served on them.

d. It is hereby declared that all the actions taken or to be taken by the 1st respondent (as the Chairman of APGA) and the 2nd Respondent as regards to congresses, conventions, primaries, meetings or flags off campaign of any kind whatsoever in disregard and disobedience to the judgment of the Supreme Court, attached as Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 4(A & B) in the affidavit in support of the Originating Summons made on the 14th of October, 2021 and subsequently corrected on the 24th March, 2023 are unlawful, illegal, null, void and of no effect whatsoever.”

In view of the above declaratory orders of the Court, INEC has accordingly recognized the NWC of APGA led by Chief Edozie Njoku and effected and replaced these changes in their portal and records with that of the Senior Counsel’s client, an act that has greatly annoyed the Senior Counsel.

Surprisingly, in their desperations to undo everything in favour of their client, even with their pending appeals to the Supreme Court challenging the decisions of the Court of Appeal, the same senior counsel have inspired and taken up fresh suits at the Federal High Courts Abuja and Anambra State, in disguise to re-litigating matters bothering on the internal affairs of a political party, already resolved by the Courts, even to the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. Their actions only suggest the counsel are forum shopping and attempting to subtly coercing the High Courts to seat on appeals, over the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. These clearly are the highest level of abuse of the Court process and a clear attempt capable of scandalizing and ridiculing the court system, which these desperate senior counsels must not be allowed to do.

The fresh suits inspired and filed by the senior counsel for and on behalf of their client, are:

a. Suit No. FHC/AWK/CS/263/2023: SIR OJUKWU OBAKASI V. INEC & ORS, pending at the Federal High Court, Awka, Anambra State; and

b. Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/966/2024: APGA & ANOR V. INEC & ANOR, pending at the Federal High Court, Abuja, FCT.

It is said that litigation must have an end and it is the duty of counsel as ministers in the temple of justice, to advice and counsel their clients in line with the law and in upholding the ethical professional code, guiding legal practitioners in their practice of law. In this case, the conducts and actions of these senior counsel are not only inimical to their oath as Legal Practitioners, but also against the rule of law, especially as Senior Advocates of Nigeria, who owe the profession a duty to uphold its integrity as the pacesetters and the light of the society.

Out complaint as stated above is borne out of the respect we have for the legal profession and the ideals it holds, which in our respectful opinion are lacking in the way and manner these senior counsel conducted themselves in the matters stated above.

We, therefore, employ you to use your good office and consider our complaint and take necessary actions that will deter desperate practitioners of your noble profession from portraying you in bad light before the right-thinking members of the society.

Forwarded with this complaint for your consideration and ease of reference are the following documents:

a. CTC of the Judgment of the Supreme Court in SC/CV/687/2021, delivered on the 14th October, 2021;

b. The CTC of the Judgment/Ruling of the Supreme Court in SC/CV/687/2021, delivered on the 24th March, 2023, also reported in NJOKU V. OKEKE & ORS (2023) LPELR-61016 (SC) and NJOKU V. OKEKE & ORS (2024) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1945) 145;

c. The CTC of the judgment delivered by Hon. Justice J. K. Omotosho in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1750/2022: OKORIE & ORS v. INEC & ORS;

d. The CTC of the processes and Rulings in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/966/2024: APGA & ANOR v. INEC & ANOR;

e. The CTC of the FCT High Court Judgment in Suit No.: FCT/HC/CV/4068/2023: OTUNBA LATEEF OGIDAN & ANOR v. CHIEF VICTOR IKE OYE & ANOR;

f. The CTCs of the Court of Appeal Judgments in Appeal Nos.: CA/ABJ/CV/724/2023 and CA/ABJ/CV/1169/2023: CHIEF VICTOR IKE OYE v. OTUNBA LATEEF OGIDAN & ORS, delivered on 28th June, 2024;

g. The CTC of the Affidavit of Fact filed by the counsel on 27th May, 2024, with the Judgment in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/CV/454/2023 and the letter dated 6th June, 2023 from the DCR of the Supreme Court;

h. The CTC of the Counter Affidavit in response of the Affidavit of Fact filed on the 7th of June, 2024, with a copy of a Petition to the President of the Court of Appeal, a letter dated 19th January, 2023 to Chief Njoku from the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court, a letter dated 7th November, 2022 from Honourable Justice Mary Odili to Chief Njoku;

i. The CTC of processes, orders and Ruling in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/966/2024, pending at the Federal High Court, Abuja;

j. The CTC of processes in Suit No. FHC/AWK/CS/263/2023, pending at the Federal High Court, Awka; and,

k. The CTC of processes evidencing appeals filed by the Senior Counsel’s client to the Supreme Court, challenging the decisions of the Court of Appeal.

l. Victor Agunzi’s petition against the presiding Judge at FCT High Court 40, Bwari.

We thank you for your promptly acting on our complaint.

~~~

Far-reaching consequences

According to a legal analyst, who spoke on condition of anonymity, the decision of LPDC will have far-reaching consequences as Ikwueto, Ikpeazu, Agunzi may face stiff sanctions if and when convicted.

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook