Group Sues Akpabio, Tajudeen, Others Over Legislation to Extend Retirement Age of NASS Staff, Challenges Pension Act 2023

In a notice at the National Industrial Court, Abuja, dated 1 March 2024, ALDRAP is challenging the legality of the legislation titled “Harmonised Retirement Age for Staff of National Assembly Service Bill, 2024.”

The suit listed the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio; Speaker of the House of Representatives, Abbas Tajudeen; Clerk of the National Assembly, Sani Tambawal; the Conference of Speakers of State Legislatures of Nigeria; National Assembly Service Commission; Parliamentary Staff Association of Nigeria (PASAN); the Revenue and Fiscal Allocation Commission; Salaries and Wages Commission; and National Pension Commission (PENCOM) as defendants.

The group is also challenging the National Assembly Pension Act 2023, stating that the Act is equally illegal.

Origin

The retirement age increment bill has been in and out of the National Assembly since the 7th Assembly but has always faced opposition from lawmakers and groups.

On Tuesday, the House passed the bill. However, it faced a hostile reception in the Senate. Majority of the senators opposed the bill during the debate on its general principle of the bill. The opposition was so fierce that it was stepped down at a point.

It was later reintroduced on Thursday and somehow scaled all legislative hurdles at the Senate and was passed for the third reading.

The bill seeks to extend the retirement age for civil servants in the nation’s parliament and across the thirty-six (36) State Houses of Assembly. It seeks to increase the number of years in service from 35 years to 40 years and retirement age from 60 years to 65 years, whichever comes first.

But with the court case, the workers of the National Assmbly appear to be divided on the move to extend the retirement age and tenure of service.

The lawsuit

ALDRAP is praying the court to answer five questions on the procedure adopted by the two chambers of the National Assembly in the passage of the bill.

One, the group claimed that National Assembly staffers, notably the clerks, are products of the constitution, hence their retirement age cannot be increased without first amending the 1999 constitution.

“The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered) recognises and categorises such staff as a special category (just as judges and judicial officers) of public servants and officers whose jobs (such as the Clerks to both the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly) responsibilities are listed and defined in the Nigerian Constitution (and not civil servants) and therefore any such changes to their retirement ought to come by way of alteration of the Constitution in accordance with Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution which prescribes the procedure for alteration of the said constitution,” the group stated.

It also insinuated that the legislation was made with selfish intent and does not reflect the wish of the majority.

“Whether the defendants are not constitutionally required to enact laws that are a reflection of the majority views of public interest instead of the views of a minority or their own self-interest considering that the majority of members of the public especially staff of the National Assembly whom are directly to be affected by this proposed legislation have written and made statements in opposition to the said Bill?”

Reliefs sought from court

The group seeks an order of the court to restrain President Bola Tinubu from assenting to the said bill, arguing that it would be counterproductive at a time the government plans to implement the 2011 Stephen Orasonye Committee Report.

It urged the court to declare that the National Assembly cannot enact a law to increase the age of retirement to sixty-five (65) years for all staff of the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly without first altering the Nigerian Constitution from which their offices are created.

Furthermore, the petitioner is asking the court to declare that the National Assembly Pensions Board Act, 2023 is illegal and repealed to the extent that it is in conflict with the Pensions Reforms Act, 2014, that the current Bill seeks to extend the age of retirement of staff to sixty-five years is unconstitutional and therefore should be discontinued.

The group is also seeking an order of interim injunction restraining Messrs Akpabio and Tajudeen and other defendants, particularly their agents, assigns, privies, servants, however so called, from taking steps to proceed or to increase the age of retirement to sixty-five years for all staff of the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly without first regard to due process of law.

“We’re yet to be served — Reps

Spokesperson for the House of Representatives, Akin Rotimi, said the House has not been served with any court paper.

“With respect to the reported filing of Originating Summons with the National Industrial Court by some interested parties, for the recognition of a number of questions relating to the subject of legislative action to increase the retirement age of parliamentary workers, the House is yet to be formally served.

“Moreover, considering the matter is now reported to be before the courts, it would be prejudicial for us to comment at this time. The House of Representatives will respond appropriately when in receipt of the summons and will ensure that all legal processes are followed in addressing the issues raised.

“We assure the public that the House of Representatives is committed to upholding the constitution, the rule of law, and respecting the judicial process in this and all matters, and importantly, acting in the overall best interest of Nigerians,” Mr Rotimi said in a statement sent to PREMIUM TIMES on Saturday.

The spokesperson for the Senate, Yemi Adaramodu, however, did not respond to a text message sent to his mobile phone.

PremiumTimes