The President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, had, in 2015, rejected a petition brought against Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama, SAN, by Ochai P. Ulegede over the Zaki Biam matter, TheNigeriaLawyer can reveal.
The letter, dated July 16, 2015, was provided to our correspondent by Gadzama’s media team upon enquiry.
Osigwe was then serving as NBA General Secretary when Ulegede petitioned the Association against Gadzama and a colleague, Henry Michael-Ihunde, over alleged unethical conduct. In the letter, addressed to Ulegede’s chambers, Ochai P. Ulegede & Co, in Makurdi, Osigwe stated that “a careful reading of the petition, failed to disclose any alleged infraction of the Rules of Professional Conduct in the Legal Profession 2007” in respect of which Gadzama and Michael-Ihunde could be called upon to explain themselves before a Disciplinary Panel of the NBA.
Osigwe’s letter set out four grounds for the dismissal. He noted that although Ulegede complained that Gadzama and his colleagues in chambers had “unnecessarily interfered and dealt with” his clients without his knowledge or approval, Ulegede appeared to have admitted in his own petition that his clients “were forced to sign” a letter purporting to debrief him. Osigwe further observed that the clients allegedly forced to sign the debriefing letter had not themselves petitioned the NBA over the alleged coercion.
The letter also accused Ulegede of approbating and reprobating, stating: “You approbated and reprobated by stating in one breath that your clients actually signed letters debriefing you and repudiating that assertion in another breath by claiming that they were forced to sign the letter debriefing you. It is either you were debriefed or you were not.” Osigwe added that only the clients who signed the letter could repudiate it, and that Ulegede had provided no evidence that they had done so.
Finally, Osigwe held that even if the NBA’s reasoning on the earlier points were wrong, the Association still could not investigate the allegation because the subject matter was already before the Federal High Court in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/M/444/2015, in which Ulegede was challenging the propriety of his being debriefed by the Benue Development Movement — rendering the issue of legal representation sub judice.
“The NBA is therefore satisfied that in the peculiar circumstance of this matter, there is no basis to further inquire into the matter by forwarding your petition to a disciplinary panel and the same will be terminated forthwith,” Osigwe wrote, signing off as General Secretary. Copies of the letter were sent to Gadzama and Michael-Ihunde.
The 2015 petition arose from the long-running Zaki Biam compensation litigation, which followed the October 2001 Nigerian military operation in which hundreds of civilians were killed and communities razed in Benue State after suspected Tiv militia killed 19 soldiers. Survivors and families of the deceased subsequently sued, producing judgments that were later consolidated into a N8 billion settlement, after original judgments totalling N41.8 billion.
The circumstances surrounding the 2015 petition are noteworthy in light of recent developments. At the time, Ulegede and another lawyer, Chris Alashi now the petitioner in Gadzama’s 2026 LPDC matter were appearing together in the Zaki Biam case, with their respective roles understood within the broader representation of the judgment creditors. In those circumstances, a complaint against Gadzama arising from the matter would naturally have been understood as arising from both lawyers’ shared representation. It remains unclear whether Gadzama was aware at the time that Alashi considered himself to hold a mandate separate and distinct from Ulegede’s.
More than a decade later, Alashi brought a fresh petition numbered BB/LPDC/1314/2024 naming both Ulegede and Gadzama as respondents in connection with the same broader Zaki Biam dispute. That petition accused Gadzama of improperly taking over clients already represented by Alashi and others, and of supporting Federal High Court proceedings that set aside two earlier Court of Appeal decisions in a manner that enabled him to assume representation in the matter. Some of the affected clients reportedly filed affidavits denying that they had instructed Gadzama.
On July 29, 2026, the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), chaired by Justice Halima Ibrahim, found both Gadzama and Ulegede liable for breaching provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners, 2023, in relation to their handling of the Zaki Biam matter.
Nigerian Bar Association
Gadzama was suspended from legal practice for three years, while Ulegede received a two-year suspension, both with immediate effect. The LPDC directed that all Heads of Superior Courts of Record in Nigeria, as well as the Inspector-General of Police, be formally notified of the decision. Gadzama has since said he has instructed his legal team to appeal the decision before the Supreme Court, maintaining that the committee’s findings were not supported by the evidence or the applicable law.
The post [REVEALED] NBA President Osigwe Rejected Ulegede’s 2015 Petition Against Gadzama, Says “No Basis To Further Inquire Into The Matter” appeared first on TheNigeriaLawyer.