The Human Rights Lawyer who was suspended for four years by the General Legal Council, has appealed against the decision.
Francis-Xavier Sosu believes the Council erred by constituting itself into a court and convicting him for a criminal offence.
In a suit filed, Wednesday, the young lawyer stated his grounds of appeal as follows;
“That the General Legal Council is convicting the Appellant in that there is no law specifically making overestimation of legal fees “grave misconduct in a professional respect.”
“That the General Legal Council, not being a court of competent jurisdiction, erred in convicting the Appellant of the criminal offence.
Sosu, who had prior, to his conviction won many landmark cases, received a huge blow to his career when he was found guilty of overcharging a client.
“The General Legal Council charged him under Rule 9 (9) of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Rules, 1969 LI 613 that he; having assisted Mr Francis Agyare in Human Rights Litigation in Accra, charged him 50,000.00 which was excessive and an overestimation of the services rendered to him, when he represented to him that he was offering pro bono legal services.”
In yet another misconduct, the Council said the lawyer, in breach of the ethics of the code of regulating the legal profession took to Facebook advertising his case by publishing pictures of the parties involved, his firm’s name, contact number, contact address and other details frowned upon by the profession.
He was also charged under Section 19(5) for failing to appear before the Disciplinary Committee when he was invited.
The Council, as a punitive measure handed a three year ban on the lawyer, a decision which has generated mixed reaction from the general public.
But the lawyer has since appealed the decision.
Among his petitions, the lawyer said the charge of touting and personal advertising levelled against him was discriminatory contrary to Article 17 of the 1992 constitution.
He added, for the charge of touting and advertising to stand, there ought to have been an identifiable complainant as prescribed by Legal Profession Act (1960), something that was missing in this case.
Francis-Xavier Sosu described the three-year ban imposed on him for touting and avdertising himself, as “harsh and excessive.”
He also indicated that the sentence of a one year mentorship by a senior lawyer imposed on him, is alien to the provisions of the Legal Profession Act 1960 Act 32.
He is hoping the Court of Appeal will intervene in the matter.