The Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) has dismissed a petition from Chief Afe Babalola’s law firm, Emmanuel Chambers, seeking to revoke the practicing license of human rights lawyer, Tomilola Farotimi (also known as Dele Farotimi), over allegations of criminal defamation and professional misconduct.
The petition, presented by lawyer Ola Faro from Emmanuel Chambers, accused Farotimi of making defamatory statements in his book, Nigeria and the Criminal Justice System. The accusations centered on claims that Farotimi had made derogatory remarks about the Supreme Court and the broader legal profession. The petition specifically pointed to references in Farotimi’s book concerning a Supreme Court case, SC/146/2006, in which he alleged corruption, bribery, and unethical practices involving judicial officers.
However, the LPDC, under the leadership of Chairman Justice Isaq Usman Bello, rejected the petition on jurisdictional grounds. In a statement issued on Tuesday in Abuja, the committee clarified that it lacked the authority to address grievances related to published material and advised the concerned parties to seek resolution through regular courts.
Justice Bello emphasized that Farotimi’s book, as a piece of intellectual property, fell outside the purview of the LPDC, which is tasked with regulating conduct during legal practice, not with addressing defamatory publications. As a result, the LPDC advised any aggrieved parties to pursue their complaints in civil courts.
The petition from Emmanuel Chambers also accused Farotimi of distorting facts in the case and undermining judicial decisions for personal gain, claiming that his actions violated the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2023. However, the LPDC’s decision has effectively nullified any immediate disciplinary action against Farotimi within the legal community.
This ruling marks a significant development in the ongoing controversy surrounding Farotimi’s critical stance on the Nigerian justice system, further igniting debates on the boundaries between legal conduct and intellectual expression.
