Dele Farotimi: Ventilate Your Grievances In Court – LPDC Tells Afe Babalola

• Rejects petition to debar Rights activist, Cites lack of jurisdiction

The law firm of Senior Lawyer, Aare Afe Babalola, Emmanuel Chambers, has lost its bid to stop controversial lawyer and author, Tomilola Titus Farotimi, popularly called Dele Farotimi, from practicing in Nigeria.

This follows the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC)’s rejection of the request by Emmanuel Chambers, seeking to revoke the law practicing license of controversial lawyer and author, Tomilola Titus Farotimi, also known as Dele Farotimi, over allegations of criminal defamation and professional misconduct.

Ola Faro, a lawyer in Emmanuel Chambers, had filed the petition against Farotimi alleging that his book titled “Nigeria and Criminal Justice System”, made defamatory statements against the Supreme Court and the legal profession.

The book reportedly referenced suit number SC/146/2006 between Major Muritala Gbadamosi Eletu and HRH Oba Tijani Akinloye and others, claiming corruption, bribery, and other unethical practices involving judicial officers and the legal community.

The petition further accused Farotimi of distorting case facts, disrespecting fellow lawyers, and engaging in actions that obstructed justice for personal gain.

Specific grievances included references to a Supreme Court judgment that affected multiple residential estates and subsequent legal proceedings undermining the apex court’s decision.

Also, the Emmanuel Chambers’ petition further claimed that Farotimi’s book violated several sections of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2023 and requested that his name be struck off the Roll of Legal Practitioners.

But in its report captured as; (B8B/LPDC/1571/2024), the LPDC averred that the alleged offenses occurred in Farotimi’s capacity as an author, not during his practice as a legal professional.

Accordingly, the LPDC through its Chairman, Justice Isaq Usman Bello, made it clear that the petition could not be granted due to jurisdictional limitations to address complaints about publications.

In throwing out the petitioner’s demand, the LPDC’s report concluded thus; “The publication is an intellectual property and not a conduct or action committed while practicing as a Legal Practitioner. All aggrieved parties who find the publication ‘defamatory’ should ventilate their grievances through the regular courts.”