Mambilla: SPI-LAW Petitions LPDC to Initiate Disciplinary Proceedings Against Ex-AGF Malami

Wale Igbintade

The Society of Public Interest Lawyers in Nigeria (SPI-LAW) has petitioned the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) of the Body of Benchers to initiate disciplinary proceedings against former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, over findings contained in an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration arising from the Mambilla Power Project dispute.

The petition, filed in Abuja on September 28, 2026, and registered as BBLPDC/2196/2026, asked LPDC to investigate allegations of professional misconduct and infamous conduct in a professional respect against the former attorney-general.

The petition was filed through lawyers, including Olukunle O. Edun, SAN, John Aikpokpo-Martins, and Olajide A. Abiodun.

Affidavits in support of the petition were deposed to by Aikpokpo-Martins, President of SPI-LAW, and Edun, its Vice President.

SPI-LAW said its complaint was based principally on findings contained in the ICC tribunal’s September 16, 2026 Final Award in Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited & Anor v. Federal Government of Nigeria, arising from the long-running dispute over the Mambilla Power Project.

The group is asking the LPDC to examine whether the conduct attributed to Malami in the arbitral proceedings and related matters amounted to professional misconduct warranting disciplinary action under the applicable rules governing legal practitioners.

According to the petition, the tribunal found that Malami and the then Minister of Power lacked actual and apparent or ostensible authority to execute the January 21, 2020 Settlement Agreement and March 25, 2020 Addendum on behalf of Nigeria.

The petition also cited the tribunal’s finding that the settlement instruments were “a product of corruption” and unenforceable for violating Nigerian public policy.

SPI-LAW further alleged that the tribunal accepted evidence that Malami directly solicited a bribe and claimed a share of the settlement sum payable to Sunrise.

It said the tribunal drew an adverse inference that “a corrupt deal was in fact reached” between Malami and Mr. Adesanya, involving an alleged promise to pay the former AGF a share of the settlement sum in exchange for committing Nigeria to the settlement instruments.

The petition also relied on the tribunal’s finding that Malami, as Nigeria’s chief law officer, “deliberately acted against the best interests of Nigeria” and was negotiating not for Nigeria but for Sunrise, allegedly motivated by “other incentive(s)”.

SPI-LAW said the tribunal further described the relationship between Malami and Adesanya as “an inappropriate relation”, marked by “a high degree of trust” and “a lack of moral compass”, while identifying red flags it considered indicative of a corrupt relationship.

Another allegation concerns Malami’s conduct during the arbitration. SPI-LAW said the former AGF, despite being in Paris during the hearing and meeting former President Muhammadu Buhari, declined to appear for cross-examination as a witness called by Nigeria.

The tribunal, according to the petition, expressed “serious dissatisfaction” with the disregard allegedly displayed by Malami for the administration of justice.

SPI-LAW is asking the LPDC to determine whether the alleged conduct violated Rule 1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners, 2023, and Section 11 of the Legal Practitioners Act.

The organisation listed the particulars of its complaint as alleged solicitation of a bribe or participation in a corrupt deal while serving as AGF; acting against the interests of Nigeria; maintaining an inappropriate relationship with a party adverse to the federal government; executing instruments without requisite authority; and disregard for the administration of justice.

The petitioners also pointed out that the 2023 professional conduct rules relied upon in the complaint were signed into law by Malami while he was Attorney-General and Minister of Justice.

SPI-LAW said the AGF’s office, as the country’s highest legal office, required absolute integrity, loyalty to the Federation and fidelity to the rule of law.

It urged the LPDC to certify that there was a case to answer and invite Malami to defend the allegations.

The organisation also submitted the ICC Final Award and certified extracts of the material findings as exhibits.

SPI-LAW said it filed the petition in the public interest pursuant to Rule 4 of the LPDC Rules, 2020, arguing that no public office holder should be beyond professional accountability.