Site icon Naijaonpoint.com.ng

Suspended Doctor Challenges NMA’s Unconstitutional Practices, Demands Compensation

Medical doctors

An Abuja-based physician and consultant, Dr. Kenenna Obiatuegwu has engaged the services of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Emmanuel Esene, in his appeal against the judgement of a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court that denied him compensation in the suit against the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA).

Esene is specifically seeking an order of the appellate court directing the NMA to pay his client the sum of N200 million as damages his client suffered as a result of his unlawful suspension by the umbrella body for medical practitioners in the country.

Justice Charles Agbaza of the FCT High Court in Maitama, had in a judgement in July this year voided Dr. Obiatuegwu’s suspension and subsequent disqualification from contesting elective positions in the NMA.

The judge, who held that the suspension was null and void because it was made in flagrant disregard of a court proceedings, however refused to order the NMA to compensate the appellant for damages suffered as a result of their unlawful and illegal conduct.

According to Justice Agbaza, although the claimant alleged to have suffered damages due to the publication of his suspension in some newspapers wherein he was described as an unruly person, the claimant failed to provide any prove in support of his claim.

Miffed by the decisions of the trial judge, Dr. Obiatuegwu, has now approached the Court of Appeal in Abuja, to set aside part of the judgement which denied him compensation.

Specifically, the senior lawyer contended that the trial court “erred in law when it held that the appellant failed to adduce evidence to entitle him to damages”.

In the six grounds of appeal Esene argued that the lower court haven found in its judgement that the appellant was indeed suspended from his medical practice which was his only source of livelihood from September 20, 2020 to July 4, 2024 when the judgement of the lower court setting aside his suspension was delivered, ought to have awarded damages in his favour.

According to Esene, “The lower court found in its judgement that the act of the respondent suspending the appellant from his medical practice, disqualifying the appellant and placing an embargo on him for life from holding any position within the respondent’s association during the pendency of Suit No: FCT/HC/895/2020 amounted to self-help.

“That the lower court did not exercise its discretion on damages in favour of the appellant judiciously and judicially after it held that the respondent acted unlawfully and in contravention of the Constitution.”

While further arguing that damages follow from the unlawful act of the respondent, the senior lawyer sought for an order allowing the appeal, “setting aside part of the judgement of the lower court and entering judgement for the appellant by granting him damages sought for in the lower court”.

He also prayed for another “order directing the respondent to pay the appellant the sum of N200 million as damages for their illegal act”.

Obiatuegwu had on January 24, 2020 filed a suit at the FCT High Court whereby he challenged the constitutional flaws that disenfranchised more than 99.5% of medical practitioners in Nigeria from participating in the election of the national officers of the Nigerian Medical Association despite paying all dues without default.

In the suit marked: FCT/HC/CV/895/2020, the medical doctor also challenged the legality of the constitutional clause that bars members from exercising their fundamental right of seeking redress in court as guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution, adding that no other law, bye-laws, rules and regulations is superior to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.

While the suit was pending in court, the National Executive Council (NEC) of NMA suspended the claimant for exercising his fundamental right in court.

Besides, the association had in a communique published on September 3, 2020 in Punch newspaper, portrayed the appellant as an unruly and undisciplined individual, thereby causing him embarrassment and damaging his reputation.

Exit mobile version